Talk presented at Early Detection of Cancer Conference, OHSU, Portland, Oregon USA, 2-4 Oct 2018, http://earlydetectionresearch.com/ in the Data Science session
Research Objects: more than the sum of the partsCarole Goble
Workshop on Managing Digital Research Objects in an Expanding Science Ecosystem, 15 Nov 2017, Bethesda, USA
https://www.rd-alliance.org/managing-digital-research-objects-expanding-science-ecosystem
Research output is more than just the rhetorical narrative. The experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows, Standard Operating Procedures, samples and so on are the objects of research that enable reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments, and they too need to be examined and exchanged as research knowledge.
A first step is to think of Digital Research Objects as a broadening out to embrace these artefacts or assets of research. The next is to recognise that investigations use multiple, interlinked, evolving artefacts. Multiple datasets and multiple models support a study; each model is associated with datasets for construction, validation and prediction; an analytic pipeline has multiple codes and may be made up of nested sub-pipelines, and so on. Research Objects (http://researchobject.org/) is a framework by which the many, nested and contributed components of research can be packaged together in a systematic way, and their context, provenance and relationships richly described.
Findable Accessable Interoperable Reusable < data |models | SOPs | samples | articles| * >. FAIR is a mantra; a meme; a myth; a mystery; a moan. For the past 15 years I have been working on FAIR in a bunch of projects and initiatives in Life Science projects. Some are top-down like Life Science European Research Infrastructures ELIXIR and ISBE, and some are bottom-up, supporting research projects in Systems and Synthetic Biology (FAIRDOM), Biodiversity (BioVel), and Pharmacology (open PHACTS), for example. Some have become movements, like Bioschemas, the Common Workflow Language and Research Objects. Others focus on cross-cutting approaches in reproducibility, computational workflows, metadata representation and scholarly sharing & publication. In this talk I will relate a series of FAIRy tales. Some of them are Grimm. Some have happy endings. Who are the villains and who are the heroes? What are the morals we can draw from these stories?
Keynote: SemSci 2017: Enabling Open Semantic Science
1st International Workshop co-located with ISWC 2017, October 2017, Vienna, Austria,
https://semsci.github.io/semSci2017/
Abstract
We have all grown up with the research article and article collections (let’s call them libraries) as the prime means of scientific discourse. But research output is more than just the rhetorical narrative. The experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows, Standard Operating Procedures, samples and so on are the objects of research that enable reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments, and they too need to be examined and exchanged as research knowledge.
We can think of “Research Objects” as different types and as packages all the components of an investigation. If we stop thinking of publishing papers and start thinking of releasing Research Objects (software), then scholar exchange is a new game: ROs and their content evolve; they are multi-authored and their authorship evolves; they are a mix of virtual and embedded, and so on.
But first, some baby steps before we get carried away with a new vision of scholarly communication. Many journals (e.g. eLife, F1000, Elsevier) are just figuring out how to package together the supplementary materials of a paper. Data catalogues are figuring out how to virtually package multiple datasets scattered across many repositories to keep the integrated experimental context.
Research Objects [1] (http://researchobject.org/) is a framework by which the many, nested and contributed components of research can be packaged together in a systematic way, and their context, provenance and relationships richly described. The brave new world of containerisation provides the containers and Linked Data provides the metadata framework for the container manifest construction and profiles. It’s not just theory, but also in practice with examples in Systems Biology modelling, Bioinformatics computational workflows, and Health Informatics data exchange. I’ll talk about why and how we got here, the framework and examples, and what we need to do.
[1] Sean Bechhofer, Iain Buchan, David De Roure, Paolo Missier, John Ainsworth, Jiten Bhagat, Philip Couch, Don Cruickshank, Mark Delderfield, Ian Dunlop, Matthew Gamble, Danius Michaelides, Stuart Owen, David Newman, Shoaib Sufi, Carole Goble, Why linked data is not enough for scientists, In Future Generation Computer Systems, Volume 29, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 599-611, ISSN 0167-739X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2011.08.004
Being FAIR: FAIR data and model management SSBSS 2017 Summer SchoolCarole Goble
Lecture 1:
Being FAIR: FAIR data and model management
In recent years we have seen a change in expectations for the management of all the outcomes of research – that is the “assets” of data, models, codes, SOPs, workflows. The “FAIR” (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship [1] have proved to be an effective rallying-cry. Funding agencies expect data (and increasingly software) management retention and access plans. Journals are raising their expectations of the availability of data and codes for pre- and post- publication. The multi-component, multi-disciplinary nature of Systems and Synthetic Biology demands the interlinking and exchange of assets and the systematic recording of metadata for their interpretation.
Our FAIRDOM project (http://www.fair-dom.org) supports Systems Biology research projects with their research data, methods and model management, with an emphasis on standards smuggled in by stealth and sensitivity to asset sharing and credit anxiety. The FAIRDOM Platform has been installed by over 30 labs or projects. Our public, centrally hosted Asset Commons, the FAIRDOMHub.org, supports the outcomes of 50+ projects.
Now established as a grassroots association, FAIRDOM has over 8 years of experience of practical asset sharing and data infrastructure at the researcher coal-face ranging across European programmes (SysMO and ERASysAPP ERANets), national initiatives (Germany's de.NBI and Systems Medicine of the Liver; Norway's Digital Life) and European Research Infrastructures (ISBE) as well as in PI's labs and Centres such as the SynBioChem Centre at Manchester.
In this talk I will show explore how FAIRDOM has been designed to support Systems Biology projects and show examples of its configuration and use. I will also explore the technical and social challenges we face.
I will also refer to European efforts to support public archives for the life sciences. ELIXIR (http:// http://www.elixir-europe.org/) the European Research Infrastructure of 21 national nodes and a hub funded by national agreements to coordinate and sustain key data repositories and archives for the Life Science community, improve access to them and related tools, support training and create a platform for dataset interoperability. As the Head of the ELIXIR-UK Node and co-lead of the ELIXIR Interoperability Platform I will show how this work relates to your projects.
[1] Wilkinson et al, The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship Scientific Data 3, doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18
Being Reproducible: SSBSS Summer School 2017Carole Goble
Lecture 2:
Being Reproducible: Models, Research Objects and R* Brouhaha
Reproducibility is a R* minefield, depending on whether you are testing for robustness (rerun), defence (repeat), certification (replicate), comparison (reproduce) or transferring between researchers (reuse). Different forms of "R" make different demands on the completeness, depth and portability of research. Sharing is another minefield raising concerns of credit and protection from sharp practices.
In practice the exchange, reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments is dependent on bundling and exchanging the experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows and so on along with the narrative. These "Research Objects" are not fixed, just as research is not “finished”: the codes fork, data is updated, algorithms are revised, workflows break, service updates are released. ResearchObject.org is an effort to systematically support more portable and reproducible research exchange.
In this talk I will explore these issues in more depth using the FAIRDOM Platform and its support for reproducible modelling. The talk will cover initiatives and technical issues, and raise social and cultural challenges.
FAIRDOM - FAIR Asset management and sharing experiences in Systems and Synthe...Carole Goble
Over the past 5 years we have seen a change in expectations for the management of all the outcomes of research – that is the “assets” of data, models, codes, SOPs and so forth. Don’t stop reading. Data management isn’t likely to win anyone a Nobel prize. But publications should be supported and accompanied by data, methods, procedures, etc. to assure reproducibility of results. Funding agencies expect data (and increasingly software) management retention and access plans as part of the proposal process for projects to be funded. Journals are raising their expectations of the availability of data and codes for pre- and post- publication. The multi-component, multi-disciplinary nature of Systems Biology demands the interlinking and exchange of assets and the systematic recording
of metadata for their interpretation.
The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship (http://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201618) has been an effective rallying-cry for EU and USA Research Infrastructures. FAIRDOM (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable Data, Operations and Models) Initiative has 8 years of experience of asset sharing and data infrastructure ranging across European programmes (SysMO and EraSysAPP ERANets), national initiatives (de.NBI, German Virtual Liver Network, UK SynBio centres) and PI's labs. It aims to support Systems and Synthetic Biology researchers with data and model management, with an emphasis on standards smuggled in by stealth and sensitivity to asset sharing and credit anxiety.
This talk will use the FAIRDOM Initiative to discuss the FAIR management of data, SOPs, and models for Sys Bio, highlighting the challenges of and approaches to sharing, credit, citation and asset infrastructures in practice. I'll also highlight recent experiments in affecting sharing using behavioural interventions.
http://www.fair-dom.org
http://www.fairdomhub.org
http://www.seek4science.org
Presented at COMBINE 2016, Newcastle, 19 September.
http://co.mbine.org/events/COMBINE_2016
Research Objects: more than the sum of the partsCarole Goble
Workshop on Managing Digital Research Objects in an Expanding Science Ecosystem, 15 Nov 2017, Bethesda, USA
https://www.rd-alliance.org/managing-digital-research-objects-expanding-science-ecosystem
Research output is more than just the rhetorical narrative. The experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows, Standard Operating Procedures, samples and so on are the objects of research that enable reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments, and they too need to be examined and exchanged as research knowledge.
A first step is to think of Digital Research Objects as a broadening out to embrace these artefacts or assets of research. The next is to recognise that investigations use multiple, interlinked, evolving artefacts. Multiple datasets and multiple models support a study; each model is associated with datasets for construction, validation and prediction; an analytic pipeline has multiple codes and may be made up of nested sub-pipelines, and so on. Research Objects (http://researchobject.org/) is a framework by which the many, nested and contributed components of research can be packaged together in a systematic way, and their context, provenance and relationships richly described.
Findable Accessable Interoperable Reusable < data |models | SOPs | samples | articles| * >. FAIR is a mantra; a meme; a myth; a mystery; a moan. For the past 15 years I have been working on FAIR in a bunch of projects and initiatives in Life Science projects. Some are top-down like Life Science European Research Infrastructures ELIXIR and ISBE, and some are bottom-up, supporting research projects in Systems and Synthetic Biology (FAIRDOM), Biodiversity (BioVel), and Pharmacology (open PHACTS), for example. Some have become movements, like Bioschemas, the Common Workflow Language and Research Objects. Others focus on cross-cutting approaches in reproducibility, computational workflows, metadata representation and scholarly sharing & publication. In this talk I will relate a series of FAIRy tales. Some of them are Grimm. Some have happy endings. Who are the villains and who are the heroes? What are the morals we can draw from these stories?
Keynote: SemSci 2017: Enabling Open Semantic Science
1st International Workshop co-located with ISWC 2017, October 2017, Vienna, Austria,
https://semsci.github.io/semSci2017/
Abstract
We have all grown up with the research article and article collections (let’s call them libraries) as the prime means of scientific discourse. But research output is more than just the rhetorical narrative. The experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows, Standard Operating Procedures, samples and so on are the objects of research that enable reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments, and they too need to be examined and exchanged as research knowledge.
We can think of “Research Objects” as different types and as packages all the components of an investigation. If we stop thinking of publishing papers and start thinking of releasing Research Objects (software), then scholar exchange is a new game: ROs and their content evolve; they are multi-authored and their authorship evolves; they are a mix of virtual and embedded, and so on.
But first, some baby steps before we get carried away with a new vision of scholarly communication. Many journals (e.g. eLife, F1000, Elsevier) are just figuring out how to package together the supplementary materials of a paper. Data catalogues are figuring out how to virtually package multiple datasets scattered across many repositories to keep the integrated experimental context.
Research Objects [1] (http://researchobject.org/) is a framework by which the many, nested and contributed components of research can be packaged together in a systematic way, and their context, provenance and relationships richly described. The brave new world of containerisation provides the containers and Linked Data provides the metadata framework for the container manifest construction and profiles. It’s not just theory, but also in practice with examples in Systems Biology modelling, Bioinformatics computational workflows, and Health Informatics data exchange. I’ll talk about why and how we got here, the framework and examples, and what we need to do.
[1] Sean Bechhofer, Iain Buchan, David De Roure, Paolo Missier, John Ainsworth, Jiten Bhagat, Philip Couch, Don Cruickshank, Mark Delderfield, Ian Dunlop, Matthew Gamble, Danius Michaelides, Stuart Owen, David Newman, Shoaib Sufi, Carole Goble, Why linked data is not enough for scientists, In Future Generation Computer Systems, Volume 29, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 599-611, ISSN 0167-739X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2011.08.004
Being FAIR: FAIR data and model management SSBSS 2017 Summer SchoolCarole Goble
Lecture 1:
Being FAIR: FAIR data and model management
In recent years we have seen a change in expectations for the management of all the outcomes of research – that is the “assets” of data, models, codes, SOPs, workflows. The “FAIR” (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship [1] have proved to be an effective rallying-cry. Funding agencies expect data (and increasingly software) management retention and access plans. Journals are raising their expectations of the availability of data and codes for pre- and post- publication. The multi-component, multi-disciplinary nature of Systems and Synthetic Biology demands the interlinking and exchange of assets and the systematic recording of metadata for their interpretation.
Our FAIRDOM project (http://www.fair-dom.org) supports Systems Biology research projects with their research data, methods and model management, with an emphasis on standards smuggled in by stealth and sensitivity to asset sharing and credit anxiety. The FAIRDOM Platform has been installed by over 30 labs or projects. Our public, centrally hosted Asset Commons, the FAIRDOMHub.org, supports the outcomes of 50+ projects.
Now established as a grassroots association, FAIRDOM has over 8 years of experience of practical asset sharing and data infrastructure at the researcher coal-face ranging across European programmes (SysMO and ERASysAPP ERANets), national initiatives (Germany's de.NBI and Systems Medicine of the Liver; Norway's Digital Life) and European Research Infrastructures (ISBE) as well as in PI's labs and Centres such as the SynBioChem Centre at Manchester.
In this talk I will show explore how FAIRDOM has been designed to support Systems Biology projects and show examples of its configuration and use. I will also explore the technical and social challenges we face.
I will also refer to European efforts to support public archives for the life sciences. ELIXIR (http:// http://www.elixir-europe.org/) the European Research Infrastructure of 21 national nodes and a hub funded by national agreements to coordinate and sustain key data repositories and archives for the Life Science community, improve access to them and related tools, support training and create a platform for dataset interoperability. As the Head of the ELIXIR-UK Node and co-lead of the ELIXIR Interoperability Platform I will show how this work relates to your projects.
[1] Wilkinson et al, The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship Scientific Data 3, doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18
Being Reproducible: SSBSS Summer School 2017Carole Goble
Lecture 2:
Being Reproducible: Models, Research Objects and R* Brouhaha
Reproducibility is a R* minefield, depending on whether you are testing for robustness (rerun), defence (repeat), certification (replicate), comparison (reproduce) or transferring between researchers (reuse). Different forms of "R" make different demands on the completeness, depth and portability of research. Sharing is another minefield raising concerns of credit and protection from sharp practices.
In practice the exchange, reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments is dependent on bundling and exchanging the experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows and so on along with the narrative. These "Research Objects" are not fixed, just as research is not “finished”: the codes fork, data is updated, algorithms are revised, workflows break, service updates are released. ResearchObject.org is an effort to systematically support more portable and reproducible research exchange.
In this talk I will explore these issues in more depth using the FAIRDOM Platform and its support for reproducible modelling. The talk will cover initiatives and technical issues, and raise social and cultural challenges.
FAIRDOM - FAIR Asset management and sharing experiences in Systems and Synthe...Carole Goble
Over the past 5 years we have seen a change in expectations for the management of all the outcomes of research – that is the “assets” of data, models, codes, SOPs and so forth. Don’t stop reading. Data management isn’t likely to win anyone a Nobel prize. But publications should be supported and accompanied by data, methods, procedures, etc. to assure reproducibility of results. Funding agencies expect data (and increasingly software) management retention and access plans as part of the proposal process for projects to be funded. Journals are raising their expectations of the availability of data and codes for pre- and post- publication. The multi-component, multi-disciplinary nature of Systems Biology demands the interlinking and exchange of assets and the systematic recording
of metadata for their interpretation.
The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship (http://www.nature.com/articles/sdata201618) has been an effective rallying-cry for EU and USA Research Infrastructures. FAIRDOM (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable Data, Operations and Models) Initiative has 8 years of experience of asset sharing and data infrastructure ranging across European programmes (SysMO and EraSysAPP ERANets), national initiatives (de.NBI, German Virtual Liver Network, UK SynBio centres) and PI's labs. It aims to support Systems and Synthetic Biology researchers with data and model management, with an emphasis on standards smuggled in by stealth and sensitivity to asset sharing and credit anxiety.
This talk will use the FAIRDOM Initiative to discuss the FAIR management of data, SOPs, and models for Sys Bio, highlighting the challenges of and approaches to sharing, credit, citation and asset infrastructures in practice. I'll also highlight recent experiments in affecting sharing using behavioural interventions.
http://www.fair-dom.org
http://www.fairdomhub.org
http://www.seek4science.org
Presented at COMBINE 2016, Newcastle, 19 September.
http://co.mbine.org/events/COMBINE_2016
Reproducibility, Research Objects and Reality, Leiden 2016Carole Goble
Presented at the Leiden Bioscience Lecture, 24 November 2016, Reproducibility, Research Objects and Reality
Over the past 5 years we have seen a change in expectations for the management of all the outcomes of research – that is the “assets” of data, models, codes, SOPs, workflows. The “FAIR” (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship have proved to be an effective rallying-cry. Funding agencies expect data (and increasingly software) management retention and access plans. Journals are raising their expectations of the availability of data and codes for pre- and post- publication. It all sounds very laudable and straightforward. BUT…..
Reproducibility is a R* minefield, depending on whether you are testing for robustness (rerun), defence (repeat), certification (replicate), comparison (reproduce) or transferring between researchers (reuse). Different forms of "R" make different demands on the completeness, depth and portability of research. Sharing is another minefield raising concerns of credit and protection from sharp practices.
In practice the exchange, reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments is dependent on bundling and exchanging the experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows and so on along with the narrative. These "Research Objects" are not fixed, just as research is not “finished”: the codes fork, data is updated, algorithms are revised, workflows break, service updates are released. ResearchObject.org is an effort to systematically support more portable and reproducible research exchange
In this talk I will explore these issues in data-driven computational life sciences through the examples and stories from initiatives I am involved, and Leiden is involved in too including:
· FAIRDOM which has built a Commons for Systems and Synthetic Biology projects, with an emphasis on standards smuggled in by stealth and efforts to affecting sharing practices using behavioural interventions
· ELIXIR, the EU Research Data Infrastructure, and its efforts to exchange workflows
· Bioschemas.org, an ELIXIR-NIH-Google effort to support the finding of assets.
NSF Workshop Data and Software Citation, 6-7 June 2016, Boston USA, Software Panel
FIndable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable Software and Data Citation: Europe, Research Objects, and BioSchemas.org
Project Website: http://www.researchobject.org/
researchobjects.org is a community project that has developed an approach to describe and package up all resources used as part of an investigation as Research Objects (RO’s).
RO’s - provide two main features; a manifest - a consistent way to provide a well-typed, structured description of the resources used in an investigation; and a ‘bundle’ - a mechanism for packaging up manifests with resources as a single, publishable unit.
RO’s therefore carry the research context of an experiment - data, software, standard operating procedures (SOPs), models etc - and gather together the components of an experiment so that they are findable, accessible, interoperable and reproducible (FAIR). RO’s combine software and data into an aggregative data structure consisting of well described reconstructable parts.
RO’s have the potential to address a number of challenges pertinent to open research including: a) supporting interoperability between infrastructures by using ROs as a primary mechanism for exchange and publication b) supporting the evolution of research objects as a living collection, enabling provenance tracking c) providing the ability to pivot research object components (data, software, models) that are not restricted to the traditional publication.
Here we present work towards the development and adoption of ROs:
(i) A series of specifications and conventions, using community standards, for the RO manifest and RO bundles.
(ii) Implementations of Java, Python and Ruby APIs and tooling against those specifications;
(iii) Examples of representations of the RO models in various languages (e.g. JSON-LD, RDF, HTML).
Metadata and Semantics Research Conference, Manchester, UK 2015
Research Objects: why, what and how,
In practice the exchange, reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments is hard, dependent on bundling and exchanging the experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows and so on along with the narrative. These "Research Objects" are not fixed, just as research is not “finished”: codes fork, data is updated, algorithms are revised, workflows break, service updates are released. Neither should they be viewed just as second-class artifacts tethered to publications, but the focus of research outcomes in their own right: articles clustered around datasets, methods with citation profiles. Many funders and publishers have come to acknowledge this, moving to data sharing policies and provisioning e-infrastructure platforms. Many researchers recognise the importance of working with Research Objects. The term has become widespread. However. What is a Research Object? How do you mint one, exchange one, build a platform to support one, curate one? How do we introduce them in a lightweight way that platform developers can migrate to? What is the practical impact of a Research Object Commons on training, stewardship, scholarship, sharing? How do we address the scholarly and technological debt of making and maintaining Research Objects? Are there any examples
I’ll present our practical experiences of the why, what and how of Research Objects.
Short talk on Research Object and their use for reproducibility and publishing in the Systems Biology Commons Platform FAIRDOMHub, and the underlying software SEEK.
FAIR Workflows and Research Objects get a Workout Carole Goble
So, you want to build a pan-national digital space for bioscience data and methods? That works with a bunch of pre-existing data repositories and processing platforms? So you can share FAIR workflows and move them between services? Package them up with data and other stuff (or just package up data for that matter)? How? WorkflowHub (https://workflowhub.eu) and RO-Crate Research Objects (https://www.researchobject.org/ro-crate) that’s how! A step towards FAIR Digital Objects gets a workout.
Presented at DataVerse Community Meeting 2021
FAIR Data, Operations and Model management for Systems Biology and Systems Me...Carole Goble
FAIR Data, Operations and Model management for Systems Biology and Systems Medicine Projects given at 1st Conference of the European Association of Systems Medicine, 26-28 October 2016, Berlin. the FAIRDOM project is described.
A keynote given on the FAIR Data Principles at the FAIRplus Innovation and SME Forum, Hinxton Genome Campus, Cambridge, UK, 29 January 2020. The history of the principles, issues about the principles and speculations about the future
What is Reproducibility? The R* brouhaha (and how Research Objects can help)Carole Goble
presented at 1st First International Workshop on Reproducible Open Science @ TPDL, 9 Sept 2016, Hannover, Germany
http://repscience2016.research-infrastructures.eu/
The swings and roundabouts of a decade of fun and games with Research Objects Carole Goble
Research Objects and their instantiation as RO-Crate: motivation, explanation, examples, history and lessons, and opportunities for scholarly communications, delivered virtually to 17th Italian Research Conference on Digital Libraries
ISMB/ECCB 2013 Keynote Goble Results may vary: what is reproducible? why do o...Carole Goble
Keynote given by Carole Goble on 23rd July 2013 at ISMB/ECCB 2013
http://www.iscb.org/ismbeccb2013
How could we evaluate research and researchers? Reproducibility underpins the scientific method: at least in principle if not practice. The willing exchange of results and the transparent conduct of research can only be expected up to a point in a competitive environment. Contributions to science are acknowledged, but not if the credit is for data curation or software. From a bioinformatics view point, how far could our results be reproducible before the pain is just too high? Is open science a dangerous, utopian vision or a legitimate, feasible expectation? How do we move bioinformatics from one where results are post-hoc "made reproducible", to pre-hoc "born reproducible"? And why, in our computational information age, do we communicate results through fragmented, fixed documents rather than cohesive, versioned releases? I will explore these questions drawing on 20 years of experience in both the development of technical infrastructure for Life Science and the social infrastructure in which Life Science operates.
RO-Crate: A framework for packaging research products into FAIR Research ObjectsCarole Goble
RO-Crate: A framework for packaging research products into FAIR Research Objects presented to Research Data Alliance RDA Data Fabric/GEDE FAIR Digital Object meeting. 2021-02-25
Reproducibility Using Semantics: An Overviewdgarijo
Overview of the different approaches for addressing reproducibilities (using semantics) in laboratory protocols, workflow description and publication and workflow infrastructure. Furthermore, Research Objects are introduced as a means to capture the context and annotations of scientific experiments, together with the privacy and IPR concerns that may arise. This presentation was presented in Dagstuhl Seminar 16041: http://www.dagstuhl.de/16041
Reproducible Research: how could Research Objects helpCarole Goble
Reproducible Research: how could Research Objects help, given at 21st Genomic Standards Consortium Meeting
Dates: May 20-23, 2019
https://press3.mcs.anl.gov/gensc/meetings/gsc21/
FAIRy stories: the FAIR Data principles in theory and in practiceCarole Goble
https://ucsb.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZYod-ippz4pHtaJ0d3ERPIFy2QIvKqjwpXR
FAIRy stories: the FAIR Data principles in theory and in practice
The ‘FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship’ [1] launched a global dialogue within research and policy communities and started a journey to wider accessibility and reusability of data and preparedness for automation-readiness (I am one of the army of authors). Over the past 5 years FAIR has become a movement, a mantra and a methodology for scientific research and increasingly in the commercial and public sector. FAIR is now part of NIH, European Commission and OECD policy. But just figuring out what the FAIR principles really mean and how we implement them has proved more challenging than one might have guessed. To quote the novelist Rick Riordan “Fairness does not mean everyone gets the same. Fairness means everyone gets what they need”.
As a data infrastructure wrangler I lead and participate in projects implementing forms of FAIR in pan-national European biomedical Research Infrastructures. We apply web-based industry-lead approaches like Schema.org; work with big pharma on specialised FAIRification pipelines for legacy data; promote FAIR by Design methodologies and platforms into the researcher lab; and expand the principles of FAIR beyond data to computational workflows and digital objects. Many use Linked Data approaches.
In this talk I’ll use some of these projects to shine some light on the FAIR movement. Spoiler alert: although there are technical issues, the greatest challenges are social. FAIR is a team sport. Knowledge Graphs play a role – not just as consumers of FAIR data but as active contributors. To paraphrase another novelist, “It is a truth universally acknowledged that a Knowledge Graph must be in want of FAIR data.”
[1] Wilkinson, M., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data 3, 160018 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18
Data Harmonization for a Molecularly Driven Health SystemWarren Kibbe
Maximizing the value of data, computing, data science in an academic medical center, or 'towards a molecularly informed Learning Health System. Given in October at the University of Florida in Gainesville
Reproducibility, Research Objects and Reality, Leiden 2016Carole Goble
Presented at the Leiden Bioscience Lecture, 24 November 2016, Reproducibility, Research Objects and Reality
Over the past 5 years we have seen a change in expectations for the management of all the outcomes of research – that is the “assets” of data, models, codes, SOPs, workflows. The “FAIR” (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship have proved to be an effective rallying-cry. Funding agencies expect data (and increasingly software) management retention and access plans. Journals are raising their expectations of the availability of data and codes for pre- and post- publication. It all sounds very laudable and straightforward. BUT…..
Reproducibility is a R* minefield, depending on whether you are testing for robustness (rerun), defence (repeat), certification (replicate), comparison (reproduce) or transferring between researchers (reuse). Different forms of "R" make different demands on the completeness, depth and portability of research. Sharing is another minefield raising concerns of credit and protection from sharp practices.
In practice the exchange, reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments is dependent on bundling and exchanging the experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows and so on along with the narrative. These "Research Objects" are not fixed, just as research is not “finished”: the codes fork, data is updated, algorithms are revised, workflows break, service updates are released. ResearchObject.org is an effort to systematically support more portable and reproducible research exchange
In this talk I will explore these issues in data-driven computational life sciences through the examples and stories from initiatives I am involved, and Leiden is involved in too including:
· FAIRDOM which has built a Commons for Systems and Synthetic Biology projects, with an emphasis on standards smuggled in by stealth and efforts to affecting sharing practices using behavioural interventions
· ELIXIR, the EU Research Data Infrastructure, and its efforts to exchange workflows
· Bioschemas.org, an ELIXIR-NIH-Google effort to support the finding of assets.
NSF Workshop Data and Software Citation, 6-7 June 2016, Boston USA, Software Panel
FIndable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable Software and Data Citation: Europe, Research Objects, and BioSchemas.org
Project Website: http://www.researchobject.org/
researchobjects.org is a community project that has developed an approach to describe and package up all resources used as part of an investigation as Research Objects (RO’s).
RO’s - provide two main features; a manifest - a consistent way to provide a well-typed, structured description of the resources used in an investigation; and a ‘bundle’ - a mechanism for packaging up manifests with resources as a single, publishable unit.
RO’s therefore carry the research context of an experiment - data, software, standard operating procedures (SOPs), models etc - and gather together the components of an experiment so that they are findable, accessible, interoperable and reproducible (FAIR). RO’s combine software and data into an aggregative data structure consisting of well described reconstructable parts.
RO’s have the potential to address a number of challenges pertinent to open research including: a) supporting interoperability between infrastructures by using ROs as a primary mechanism for exchange and publication b) supporting the evolution of research objects as a living collection, enabling provenance tracking c) providing the ability to pivot research object components (data, software, models) that are not restricted to the traditional publication.
Here we present work towards the development and adoption of ROs:
(i) A series of specifications and conventions, using community standards, for the RO manifest and RO bundles.
(ii) Implementations of Java, Python and Ruby APIs and tooling against those specifications;
(iii) Examples of representations of the RO models in various languages (e.g. JSON-LD, RDF, HTML).
Metadata and Semantics Research Conference, Manchester, UK 2015
Research Objects: why, what and how,
In practice the exchange, reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments is hard, dependent on bundling and exchanging the experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows and so on along with the narrative. These "Research Objects" are not fixed, just as research is not “finished”: codes fork, data is updated, algorithms are revised, workflows break, service updates are released. Neither should they be viewed just as second-class artifacts tethered to publications, but the focus of research outcomes in their own right: articles clustered around datasets, methods with citation profiles. Many funders and publishers have come to acknowledge this, moving to data sharing policies and provisioning e-infrastructure platforms. Many researchers recognise the importance of working with Research Objects. The term has become widespread. However. What is a Research Object? How do you mint one, exchange one, build a platform to support one, curate one? How do we introduce them in a lightweight way that platform developers can migrate to? What is the practical impact of a Research Object Commons on training, stewardship, scholarship, sharing? How do we address the scholarly and technological debt of making and maintaining Research Objects? Are there any examples
I’ll present our practical experiences of the why, what and how of Research Objects.
Short talk on Research Object and their use for reproducibility and publishing in the Systems Biology Commons Platform FAIRDOMHub, and the underlying software SEEK.
FAIR Workflows and Research Objects get a Workout Carole Goble
So, you want to build a pan-national digital space for bioscience data and methods? That works with a bunch of pre-existing data repositories and processing platforms? So you can share FAIR workflows and move them between services? Package them up with data and other stuff (or just package up data for that matter)? How? WorkflowHub (https://workflowhub.eu) and RO-Crate Research Objects (https://www.researchobject.org/ro-crate) that’s how! A step towards FAIR Digital Objects gets a workout.
Presented at DataVerse Community Meeting 2021
FAIR Data, Operations and Model management for Systems Biology and Systems Me...Carole Goble
FAIR Data, Operations and Model management for Systems Biology and Systems Medicine Projects given at 1st Conference of the European Association of Systems Medicine, 26-28 October 2016, Berlin. the FAIRDOM project is described.
A keynote given on the FAIR Data Principles at the FAIRplus Innovation and SME Forum, Hinxton Genome Campus, Cambridge, UK, 29 January 2020. The history of the principles, issues about the principles and speculations about the future
What is Reproducibility? The R* brouhaha (and how Research Objects can help)Carole Goble
presented at 1st First International Workshop on Reproducible Open Science @ TPDL, 9 Sept 2016, Hannover, Germany
http://repscience2016.research-infrastructures.eu/
The swings and roundabouts of a decade of fun and games with Research Objects Carole Goble
Research Objects and their instantiation as RO-Crate: motivation, explanation, examples, history and lessons, and opportunities for scholarly communications, delivered virtually to 17th Italian Research Conference on Digital Libraries
ISMB/ECCB 2013 Keynote Goble Results may vary: what is reproducible? why do o...Carole Goble
Keynote given by Carole Goble on 23rd July 2013 at ISMB/ECCB 2013
http://www.iscb.org/ismbeccb2013
How could we evaluate research and researchers? Reproducibility underpins the scientific method: at least in principle if not practice. The willing exchange of results and the transparent conduct of research can only be expected up to a point in a competitive environment. Contributions to science are acknowledged, but not if the credit is for data curation or software. From a bioinformatics view point, how far could our results be reproducible before the pain is just too high? Is open science a dangerous, utopian vision or a legitimate, feasible expectation? How do we move bioinformatics from one where results are post-hoc "made reproducible", to pre-hoc "born reproducible"? And why, in our computational information age, do we communicate results through fragmented, fixed documents rather than cohesive, versioned releases? I will explore these questions drawing on 20 years of experience in both the development of technical infrastructure for Life Science and the social infrastructure in which Life Science operates.
RO-Crate: A framework for packaging research products into FAIR Research ObjectsCarole Goble
RO-Crate: A framework for packaging research products into FAIR Research Objects presented to Research Data Alliance RDA Data Fabric/GEDE FAIR Digital Object meeting. 2021-02-25
Reproducibility Using Semantics: An Overviewdgarijo
Overview of the different approaches for addressing reproducibilities (using semantics) in laboratory protocols, workflow description and publication and workflow infrastructure. Furthermore, Research Objects are introduced as a means to capture the context and annotations of scientific experiments, together with the privacy and IPR concerns that may arise. This presentation was presented in Dagstuhl Seminar 16041: http://www.dagstuhl.de/16041
Reproducible Research: how could Research Objects helpCarole Goble
Reproducible Research: how could Research Objects help, given at 21st Genomic Standards Consortium Meeting
Dates: May 20-23, 2019
https://press3.mcs.anl.gov/gensc/meetings/gsc21/
FAIRy stories: the FAIR Data principles in theory and in practiceCarole Goble
https://ucsb.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZYod-ippz4pHtaJ0d3ERPIFy2QIvKqjwpXR
FAIRy stories: the FAIR Data principles in theory and in practice
The ‘FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship’ [1] launched a global dialogue within research and policy communities and started a journey to wider accessibility and reusability of data and preparedness for automation-readiness (I am one of the army of authors). Over the past 5 years FAIR has become a movement, a mantra and a methodology for scientific research and increasingly in the commercial and public sector. FAIR is now part of NIH, European Commission and OECD policy. But just figuring out what the FAIR principles really mean and how we implement them has proved more challenging than one might have guessed. To quote the novelist Rick Riordan “Fairness does not mean everyone gets the same. Fairness means everyone gets what they need”.
As a data infrastructure wrangler I lead and participate in projects implementing forms of FAIR in pan-national European biomedical Research Infrastructures. We apply web-based industry-lead approaches like Schema.org; work with big pharma on specialised FAIRification pipelines for legacy data; promote FAIR by Design methodologies and platforms into the researcher lab; and expand the principles of FAIR beyond data to computational workflows and digital objects. Many use Linked Data approaches.
In this talk I’ll use some of these projects to shine some light on the FAIR movement. Spoiler alert: although there are technical issues, the greatest challenges are social. FAIR is a team sport. Knowledge Graphs play a role – not just as consumers of FAIR data but as active contributors. To paraphrase another novelist, “It is a truth universally acknowledged that a Knowledge Graph must be in want of FAIR data.”
[1] Wilkinson, M., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. et al. The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data 3, 160018 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.18
Data Harmonization for a Molecularly Driven Health SystemWarren Kibbe
Maximizing the value of data, computing, data science in an academic medical center, or 'towards a molecularly informed Learning Health System. Given in October at the University of Florida in Gainesville
Data Harmonization for a Molecularly Driven Health SystemWarren Kibbe
Seminar for Dr. Min Zhang's Purdue Bioinformatics Seminar Series. Touched on learning health systems, the Gen3 Data Commons, the NCI Genomic Data Commons, Data Harmonization, FAIR, and open science.
Scott Edmunds: GigaScience - a journal or a database? Lessons learned from th...GigaScience, BGI Hong Kong
Scott Edmunds talk at the HUPO congress in Geneva, September 6th 2011 on GigaScience - a journal or a database? Lessons learned from the Genomics Tsunami.
COMBINE 2019, EU-STANDS4PM, Heidelberg, Germany 18 July 2019
FAIR: Findable Accessable Interoperable Reusable. The “FAIR Principles” for research data, software, computational workflows, scripts, or any other kind of Research Object one can think of, is now a mantra; a method; a meme; a myth; a mystery. FAIR is about supporting and tracking the flow and availability of data across research organisations and the portability and sustainability of processing methods to enable transparent and reproducible results. All this is within the context of a bottom up society of collaborating (or burdened?) scientists, a top down collective of compliance-focused funders and policy makers and an in-the-middle posse of e-infrastructure providers.
Making the FAIR principles a reality is tricky. They are aspirations not standards. They are multi-dimensional and dependent on context such as the sensitivity and availability of the data and methods. We already see a jungle of projects, initiatives and programmes wrestling with the challenges. FAIR efforts have particularly focused on the “last mile” – “FAIRifying” destination community archive repositories and measuring their “compliance” to FAIR metrics (or less controversially “indicators”). But what about FAIR at the first mile, at source and how do we help Alice and Bob with their (secure) data management? If we tackle the FAIR first and last mile, what about the FAIR middle? What about FAIR beyond just data – like exchanging and reusing pipelines for precision medicine?
Since 2008 the FAIRDOM collaboration [1] has worked on FAIR asset management and the development of a FAIR asset Commons for multi-partner researcher projects [2], initially in the Systems Biology field. Since 2016 we have been working with the BioCompute Object Partnership [3] on standardising computational records of HTS precision medicine pipelines.
So, using our FAIRDOM and BioCompute Object binoculars let’s go on a FAIR safari! Let’s peruse the ecosystem, observe the different herds and reflect what where we are for FAIR personalised medicine.
References
[1] http://www.fair-dom.org
[2] http://www.fairdomhub.org
[3] http://www.biocomputeobject.org
Next-Generation Search Engines for Information RetrievalWaqas Tariq
In the recent years, there have been significant advancements in the areas of scientific data management and retrieval techniques, particularly in terms of standards and protocols for archiving data and metadata. Scientific data is generally rich, not easy to understand, and spread across different places. In order to integrate these pieces together, a data archive and associated metadata should be generated. This data should be stored in a format that can be locatable, retrievable and understandable, more importantly it should be in a form that will continue to be accessible as technology changes, such as XML. New search technologies are being implemented around these protocols, which makes searching easy, fast and yet robust. One such system, Mercury, a metadata harvesting, data discovery, and access system, built for researchers to search to, share and obtain spatiotemporal data used across a range of climate and ecological sciences.
Introduction to Jackson Labs, JMCRS, Clinical Services and Scientific Services at the Jackson Labs. Differences between long and short read sequencing. FAIR Data Action Plan. Metadata needs. Data Commons and the need to capture sample specific gene models discovered.
Enabling Discovery in High-Risk Plaque using Semantic Web ApproachesTom Plasterer
Enabling Discovery in High-Risk Plaque using Semantic Web Approaches
The HRP initiative (HRP) is a joint research and development effort to advance the understanding, recognition and management of high-risk plaque for the benefit of multiple stakeholders in the healthcare system. As the primary underlying cause of heart attacks, high-risk, or vulnerable plaque is the number one cause of death in the Western world. There are currently no methods of screening, diagnosis or treatment for high-risk plaque.
The HRP initiative leverages recent advances in biology and information technology to design and optimize a care-cycle for high-risk plaque, promising to reduce morbidity, mortality and cost associated with cardiovascular disease. This Initiative is being led by the world’s foremost scientists in the fields of cardiology, pathology, and imaging, and is made possible through funding by leading pharmaceutical and medical technology entities.
HRP takes advantages of semantic web technologies for physician and researcher-lead data analysis and data interoperability. One of the key applications is a web tool linking patient demographics, clinical chemistries, physical measurements and cardiovascular imaging modalities. This empowers scientists to rapidly compare multiple clinical parameters to find patients of interest, assisting greatly in defining high-risk plaque.
The Human Cell Atlas Data Coordination PlatformLaura Clarke
This presentation gives a brief summary of the Human Cell Atlas project and describes the data coordination platform which is being built to support it.
Branch: An interactive, web-based tool for building decision tree classifiersBenjamin Good
A crucial task in modern biology is the prediction of complex phenotypes, such as breast cancer prognosis, from genome-wide measurements. Machine learning algorithms can sometimes infer predictive patterns, but there is rarely enough data to train and test them effectively and the patterns that they identify are often expressed in forms (e.g. support vector machines, neural networks, random forests composed of 10s of thousands of trees) that are highly difficult to understand. In addition, it is generally unclear how to include prior knowledge in the course of their construction.
Decision trees provide an intuitive visual form that can capture complex interactions between multiple variables. Effective methods exist for inferring decision trees automatically but it has been shown that these techniques can be improved upon via the manual interventions of experts. Here, we introduce Branch, a new Web-based tool for the interactive construction of decision trees from genomic datasets. Branch offers the ability to: (1) upload and share datasets intended for classification tasks (in progress), (2) construct decision trees by manually selecting features such as genes for a gene expression dataset, (3) collaboratively edit decision trees, (4) create feature functions that aggregate content from multiple independent features into single decision nodes (e.g. pathways) and (5) evaluate decision tree classifiers in terms of precision and recall. The tool is optimized for genomic use cases through the inclusion of gene and pathway-based search functions.
Branch enables expert biologists to easily engage directly with high-throughput datasets without the need for a team of bioinformaticians. The tree building process allows researchers to rapidly test hypotheses about interactions between biological variables and phenotypes in ways that would otherwise require extensive computational sophistication. In so doing, this tool can both inform biological research and help to produce more accurate, more meaningful classifiers.
A prototype of Branch is available at http://biobranch.org/
The ELIXIR FAIR Knowledge Ecosystem for practical know-how: RDMkit and FAIRCo...Carole Goble
Presented at the FAIR Data in Practice Symposium, 16 may 2023 at BioITWorld Boston. https://www.bio-itworldexpo.com/fair-data. The ELIXIR European research Infrastructure for life science data is an inter-governmental organizations coordinating, integrating and sustaining FAIR data and software resources across its 23 nations. To help advise users, data stewards, project managers and service providers, ELIXIR has developed complementary community-driven, open knowledge resources for guiding FAIR Research Data Management (RDMkit) and providing FAIRification recipes (FAIRCookbook). 150+ people have contributed content so far, including representatives of the pharmaceutical industry.
Can’t Pay, Won’t Pay, Don’t Pay: Delivering open science, a Digital Research...Carole Goble
Invited talk, PHIL_OS, March 30-31 2023, Exeter
https://opensciencestudies.eu/whither-open-science. Includes hidden slides.
FAIR and Open Science needs Digital Research Infrastructure, which is a federated system of systems and needs funding models that are fit for purpose
Culture change needed for paying for Open Science’s infrastructure and funding support for data driven research needs more reality and less rhetoric
RO-Crate: packaging metadata love notes into FAIR Digital ObjectsCarole Goble
Abstract
slides available at: https://zenodo.org/record/7147703#.Y7agoxXP2F4
The Helmholtz Metadata Collaboration aims to make the research data [and software] produced by Helmholtz Centres FAIR for their own and the wider science community by means of metadata enrichment [1]. Why metadata enrichment and why FAIR? Because the whole scientific enterprise depends on a cycle of finding, exchanging, understanding, validating, reproducing), integrating and reusing research entities across a dispersed community of researchers.
Metadata is not just “a love note to the future” [2], it is a love note to today’s collaborators and peers. Moreover, a FAIR Commons must cater for the metadata of all the entities of research – data, software, workflows, protocols, instruments, geo-spatial locations, specimens, samples, people (well as traditional articles) – and their interconnectivity. That is a lot of metadata love notes to manage, bundle up and move around. Notes written in different languages at different times by different folks, produced and hosted by different platforms, yet referring to each other, and building an integrated picture of a multi-part and multi-party investigation. We need a crate!
RO-Crate [3] is an open, community-driven, and lightweight approach to packaging research entities along with their metadata in a machine-readable manner. Following key principles - “just enough” and “developer and legacy friendliness - RO-Crate simplifies the process of making research outputs FAIR while also enhancing research reproducibility and citability. As a self-describing and unbounded “metadata middleware” framework RO-Crate shows that a little bit of packaging goes a long way to realise the goals of FAIR Digital Objects (FDO)[4], and to not just overcome platform diversity but celebrate it while retaining investigation contextual integrity.
In this talk I will present the why, and how Research Object packaging eases Metadata Collaboration using examples in big data and mixed object exchange, mixed object archiving and publishing, mass citation, and reproducibility. Some examples come from the HMC, others from EOSC, USA and Australia, and from different disciplines.
Metadata is a love note to the future, RO-Crate is the delivery package.
[1] https://helmholtz-metadaten.de/en
[2] Scott, Jason The Metadata Mania, http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/3181, June 2011
[3] Soiland-Reyes, Stian et al. “Packaging Research Artefacts with RO-Crate”. Data Science, 2022; 5(2):97-138, DOI: 10.3233/DS-210053
[4] De Smedt K, Koureas D, Wittenburg P. “FAIR Digital Objects for Science: From Data Pieces to Actionable Knowledge Units”. Publications. 2020; 8(2):21. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications8020021
Research Software Sustainability takes a VillageCarole Goble
The Research Software Alliance (ReSA) and the Netherlands eScience Center hosted a two-day international workshop to set the future agenda for national and international funders to support sustainable research software.
As the importance of software in research has become increasingly apparent, so has the urgent need to sustain it. Funders can play a crucial role in this respect by ensuring structural support. Over the past few years, a variety of methods for sustaining research software have been explored, including improving and extending funding policies and instruments. During the workshop, funding organizations joined forces to explore how they can effectively contribute to making research software sustainable.
This keynote helped frame the discussion from the perspective of community involvement in research software sustainability.
https://future-of-research-software.org/
this talk is available at Goble, Carole. (2022, November 8). Research Software Sustainability takes a Village. International funders workshop, The Future of Research Software, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7304596
“Bioscience has emerged as a data-rich discipline, in a transformation that is spreading as widely now as molecular biology in the twentieth century. We look forward to supporting new research careers, where data are valued and shared widely, where new software is a natural part of Biology, and where re-analysis and modelling are as creative as experimentation in understanding the rules of life and their applications.” Prof Andrew Millar FRS, chair Expert Group UKRI-BBSRC Review of data-intensive bioscience 2020.
Indeed - biomedical science is knowledge work and knowledge turning - the turning of observation and hypothesis through experimentation, comparison, and analysis into new, pooled knowledge. Turns depend on the FAIR and Open flow and availability of data and methods for automated processing and reproducible results, and on a society of scientists coordinating and collaborating.
For the past 25 years I have worked on the social and technical challenges in digital infrastructure to support scientific collaboration, data and method sharing, and automate scientific processing. Big ideas I have been instrumental in – sharing and publishing high quality computational workflows, semantic web technologies in bioscience, ecosystems of Research Objects as the currency of scholarly knowledge, FAIR data principles - preached revolution to inspire but need nudges* to get traction.
I’ll talk about making good on Andrew’s quote: what I’m doing to nudge and where we need to do more. I’ll also talk about my experiences as a woman in a digital infrastructure and computer science over the past 40 years – and some nudging is needed there too.
*Thaler RH, Sunstein CR (2008) Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-14-311526-7. OCLC 791403664.
https://www.bsc.es/research-and-development/research-seminars/hybrid-bsc-rslife-sessionbioinfo4women-seminar-love-money-fame-nudge-enabling-data-intensive
Open Research: Manchester leading and learningCarole Goble
Open and FAIR science has an international momentum. Large scale communities are striving to make and manage the digital infrastructure needed for scientists to be open as possible, closed as necessary, as expected by the NIH, OECD, UNESCO and the EC. ELIXIR is such a research infrastructure in Europe for Life Sciences. This talk will highlight two of ELIXIR's Open Science resources built by Open Science communities to enable life science researchers to be open, and led by Manchester. And how can we learn from these and bring these practices to Manchester?
Launch: Manchester Office for Open Research, 4th April 2022
https://www.openresearch.manchester.ac.uk/
RDMkit, a Research Data Management Toolkit. Built by the Community for the ...Carole Goble
https://datascience.nih.gov/news/march-data-sharing-and-reuse-seminar 11 March 2022
Starting in 2023, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) will require institutes and researchers receiving funding to include a Data Management Plan (DMP) in their grant applications, including the making their data publicly available. Similar mandates are already in place in Europe, for example a DMP is mandatory in Horizon Europe projects involving data.
Policy is one thing - practice is quite another. How do we provide the necessary information, guidance and advice for our bioscientists, researchers, data stewards and project managers? There are numerous repositories and standards. Which is best? What are the challenges at each step of the data lifecycle? How should different types of data? What tools are available? Research Data Management advice is often too general to be useful and specific information is fragmented and hard to find.
ELIXIR, the pan-national European Research Infrastructure for Life Science data, aims to enable research projects to operate “FAIR data first”. ELIXIR supports researchers across their whole RDM lifecycle, navigating the complexity of a data ecosystem that bridges from local cyberinfrastructures to pan-national archives and across bio-domains.
The ELIXIR RDMkit (https://rdmkit.elixir-europe.org (link is external)) is a toolkit built by the biosciences community, for the biosciences community to provide the RDM information they need. It is a framework for advice and best practice for RDM and acts as a hub of RDM information, with links to tool registries, training materials, standards, and databases, and to services that offer deeper knowledge for DMP planning and FAIR-ification practices.
Launched in March 2021, over 120 contributors have provided nearly 100 pages of content and links to more than 300 tools. Content covers the data lifecycle and specialized domains in biology, national considerations and examples of “tool assemblies” developed to support RDM. It has been accessed by over 123 countries, and the top of the access list is … the United States.
The RDMkit is already a recommended resource of the European Commission. The platform, editorial, and contributor methods helped build a specialized sister toolkit for infectious diseases as part of the recently launched BY-COVID project. The toolkit’s platform is the simplest we could manage - built on plain GitHub - and the whole development and contribution approach tailored to be as lightweight and sustainable as possible.
In this talk, Carole and Frederik will present the RDMkit; aims and context, content, community management, how folks can contribute, and our future plans and potential prospects for trans-Atlantic cooperation.
Data policy must be partnered with data practice. Our researchers need to be the best informed in order to meet these new data management and data sharing mandates.
presented at WORKS 2021
https://works-workshop.org/
16th Workshop on Workflows in Support of Large-Scale Science
November 15, 2021
Held in conjunction with SC21: The International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis
presentation at https://researchsoft.github.io/FAIReScience/, FAIReScience 2021 online workshop
virtually co-located with the 17th IEEE International Conference on eScience (eScience 2021)
German Conference on Bioinformatics 2021
https://gcb2021.de/
FAIR Computational Workflows
Computational workflows capture precise descriptions of the steps and data dependencies needed to carry out computational data pipelines, analysis and simulations in many areas of Science, including the Life Sciences. The use of computational workflows to manage these multi-step computational processes has accelerated in the past few years driven by the need for scalable data processing, the exchange of processing know-how, and the desire for more reproducible (or at least transparent) and quality assured processing methods. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has significantly highlighted the value of workflows.
This increased interest in workflows has been matched by the number of workflow management systems available to scientists (Galaxy, Snakemake, Nextflow and 270+ more) and the number of workflow services like registries and monitors. There is also recognition that workflows are first class, publishable Research Objects just as data are. They deserve their own FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles and services that cater for their dual roles as explicit method description and software method execution [1]. To promote long-term usability and uptake by the scientific community, workflows (as well as the tools that integrate them) should become FAIR+R(eproducible), and citable so that author’s credit is attributed fairly and accurately.
The work on improving the FAIRness of workflows has already started and a whole ecosystem of tools, guidelines and best practices has been under development to reduce the time needed to adapt, reuse and extend existing scientific workflows. An example is the EOSC-Life Cluster of 13 European Biomedical Research Infrastructures which is developing a FAIR Workflow Collaboratory based on the ELIXIR Research Infrastructure for Life Science Data Tools ecosystem. While there are many tools for addressing different aspects of FAIR workflows, many challenges remain for describing, annotating, and exposing scientific workflows so that they can be found, understood and reused by other scientists.
This keynote will explore the FAIR principles for computational workflows in the Life Science using the EOSC-Life Workflow Collaboratory as an example.
[1] Carole Goble, Sarah Cohen-Boulakia, Stian Soiland-Reyes,Daniel Garijo, Yolanda Gil, Michael R. Crusoe, Kristian Peters, and Daniel Schober FAIR Computational Workflows Data Intelligence 2020 2:1-2, 108-121 https://doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00033.
FAIR Data Bridging from researcher data management to ELIXIR archives in the...Carole Goble
ISMB-ECCB 2021, NIH/ODSS Session, 27 July 2021
ELIXIR is the pan-national European Research Infrastructure for Life Science data, whose 23 national nodes and the EBI coordinate the development and long-term sustainability of domain public databases. FAIR services, policies and curation approaches aim to build a FAIR connected data ecosystem of trusted domain repositories, from ENA, HPA and EGA to specialised resources like CorkOakDB and PIPPA for plant phenotypes. But this is only one part of the data landscape and often the end of data’s journey. The nodes support research projects to operate “FAIR data first”, working with institutional and national platforms that are often generic or designed for project-based data management. We need to bridge between project-based and community-based, and support researchers across their whole RDM lifecycle, navigating the complexity this ecosystem. The ELIXIR-CONVERGE project and its flagship RDMkit toolkit (https://rdmkit.elixir-europe.org) aims to do just that.
FAIR Computational Workflows
Computational workflows capture precise descriptions of the steps and data dependencies needed to carry out computational data pipelines, analysis and simulations in many areas of Science, including the Life Sciences. The use of computational workflows to manage these multi-step computational processes has accelerated in the past few years driven by the need for scalable data processing, the exchange of processing know-how, and the desire for more reproducible (or at least transparent) and quality assured processing methods. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has significantly highlighted the value of workflows.
This increased interest in workflows has been matched by the number of workflow management systems available to scientists (Galaxy, Snakemake, Nextflow and 270+ more) and the number of workflow services like registries and monitors. There is also recognition that workflows are first class, publishable Research Objects just as data are. They deserve their own FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles and services that cater for their dual roles as explicit method description and software method execution [1]. To promote long-term usability and uptake by the scientific community, workflows (as well as the tools that integrate them) should become FAIR+R(eproducible), and citable so that author’s credit is attributed fairly and accurately.
The work on improving the FAIRness of workflows has already started and a whole ecosystem of tools, guidelines and best practices has been under development to reduce the time needed to adapt, reuse and extend existing scientific workflows. An example is the EOSC-Life Cluster of 13 European Biomedical Research Infrastructures which is developing a FAIR Workflow Collaboratory based on the ELIXIR Research Infrastructure for Life Science Data Tools ecosystem. While there are many tools for addressing different aspects of FAIR workflows, many challenges remain for describing, annotating, and exposing scientific workflows so that they can be found, understood and reused by other scientists.
This keynote will explore the FAIR principles for computational workflows in the Life Science using the EOSC-Life Workflow Collaboratory as an example.
[1] Carole Goble, Sarah Cohen-Boulakia, Stian Soiland-Reyes,Daniel Garijo, Yolanda Gil, Michael R. Crusoe, Kristian Peters, and Daniel Schober FAIR Computational Workflows Data Intelligence 2020 2:1-2, 108-121 https://doi.org/10.1162/dint_a_00033.
How are we Faring with FAIR? (and what FAIR is not)Carole Goble
Keynote presented at the workshop FAIRe Data Infrastructures, 15 October 2020
https://www.gmds.de/aktivitaeten/medizinische-informatik/projektgruppenseiten/faire-dateninfrastrukturen-fuer-die-biomedizinische-informatik/workshop-2020/
Remarkably it was only in 2016 that the ‘FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship’ appeared in Scientific Data. The paper was intended to launch a dialogue within the research and policy communities: to start a journey to wider accessibility and reusability of data and prepare for automation-readiness by supporting findability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability for machines. Many of the authors (including myself) came from biomedical and associated communities. The paper succeeded in its aim, at least at the policy, enterprise and professional data infrastructure level. Whether FAIR has impacted the researcher at the bench or bedside is open to doubt. It certainly inspired a great deal of activity, many projects, a lot of positioning of interests and raised awareness. COVID has injected impetus and urgency to the FAIR cause (good) and also highlighted its politicisation (not so good).
In this talk I’ll make some personal reflections on how we are faring with FAIR: as one of the original principles authors; as a participant in many current FAIR initiatives (particularly in the biomedical sector and for research objects other than data) and as a veteran of FAIR before we had the principles.
FAIRy stories: tales from building the FAIR Research CommonsCarole Goble
Plenary Lecture Presented at INCF Neuroinformatics 2019 https://www.neuroinformatics2019.org
Title: FAIRy stories: tales from building the FAIR Research Commons
Findable Accessable Interoperable Reusable. The “FAIR Principles” for research data, software, computational workflows, scripts, or any kind of Research Object is a mantra; a method; a meme; a myth; a mystery. For the past 15 years I have been working on FAIR in a range of projects and initiatives in the Life Sciences as we try to build the FAIR Research Commons. Some are top-down like the European Research Infrastructures ELIXIR, ISBE and IBISBA, and the NIH Data Commons. Some are bottom-up, supporting FAIR for investigator-led projects (FAIRDOM), biodiversity analytics (BioVel), and FAIR drug discovery (Open PHACTS, FAIRplus). Some have become movements, like Bioschemas, the Common Workflow Language and Research Objects. Others focus on cross-cutting approaches in reproducibility, computational workflows, metadata representation and scholarly sharing & publication. In this talk I will relate a series of FAIRy tales. Some of them are Grimm. There are villains and heroes. Some have happy endings; all have morals.
Reflections on a (slightly unusual) multi-disciplinary academic careerCarole Goble
Talk given at the School of Computer Science, The University of Manchester, UK Postgraduate Research Symposium 2019
the Carole Goble Doctoral Paper award was given for the first time
Deep Behavioral Phenotyping in Systems Neuroscience for Functional Atlasing a...Ana Luísa Pinho
Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) provides means to characterize brain activations in response to behavior. However, cognitive neuroscience has been limited to group-level effects referring to the performance of specific tasks. To obtain the functional profile of elementary cognitive mechanisms, the combination of brain responses to many tasks is required. Yet, to date, both structural atlases and parcellation-based activations do not fully account for cognitive function and still present several limitations. Further, they do not adapt overall to individual characteristics. In this talk, I will give an account of deep-behavioral phenotyping strategies, namely data-driven methods in large task-fMRI datasets, to optimize functional brain-data collection and improve inference of effects-of-interest related to mental processes. Key to this approach is the employment of fast multi-functional paradigms rich on features that can be well parametrized and, consequently, facilitate the creation of psycho-physiological constructs to be modelled with imaging data. Particular emphasis will be given to music stimuli when studying high-order cognitive mechanisms, due to their ecological nature and quality to enable complex behavior compounded by discrete entities. I will also discuss how deep-behavioral phenotyping and individualized models applied to neuroimaging data can better account for the subject-specific organization of domain-general cognitive systems in the human brain. Finally, the accumulation of functional brain signatures brings the possibility to clarify relationships among tasks and create a univocal link between brain systems and mental functions through: (1) the development of ontologies proposing an organization of cognitive processes; and (2) brain-network taxonomies describing functional specialization. To this end, tools to improve commensurability in cognitive science are necessary, such as public repositories, ontology-based platforms and automated meta-analysis tools. I will thus discuss some brain-atlasing resources currently under development, and their applicability in cognitive as well as clinical neuroscience.
THE IMPORTANCE OF MARTIAN ATMOSPHERE SAMPLE RETURN.Sérgio Sacani
The return of a sample of near-surface atmosphere from Mars would facilitate answers to several first-order science questions surrounding the formation and evolution of the planet. One of the important aspects of terrestrial planet formation in general is the role that primary atmospheres played in influencing the chemistry and structure of the planets and their antecedents. Studies of the martian atmosphere can be used to investigate the role of a primary atmosphere in its history. Atmosphere samples would also inform our understanding of the near-surface chemistry of the planet, and ultimately the prospects for life. High-precision isotopic analyses of constituent gases are needed to address these questions, requiring that the analyses are made on returned samples rather than in situ.
A brief information about the SCOP protein database used in bioinformatics.
The Structural Classification of Proteins (SCOP) database is a comprehensive and authoritative resource for the structural and evolutionary relationships of proteins. It provides a detailed and curated classification of protein structures, grouping them into families, superfamilies, and folds based on their structural and sequence similarities.
Observation of Io’s Resurfacing via Plume Deposition Using Ground-based Adapt...Sérgio Sacani
Since volcanic activity was first discovered on Io from Voyager images in 1979, changes
on Io’s surface have been monitored from both spacecraft and ground-based telescopes.
Here, we present the highest spatial resolution images of Io ever obtained from a groundbased telescope. These images, acquired by the SHARK-VIS instrument on the Large
Binocular Telescope, show evidence of a major resurfacing event on Io’s trailing hemisphere. When compared to the most recent spacecraft images, the SHARK-VIS images
show that a plume deposit from a powerful eruption at Pillan Patera has covered part
of the long-lived Pele plume deposit. Although this type of resurfacing event may be common on Io, few have been detected due to the rarity of spacecraft visits and the previously low spatial resolution available from Earth-based telescopes. The SHARK-VIS instrument ushers in a new era of high resolution imaging of Io’s surface using adaptive
optics at visible wavelengths.
Slide 1: Title Slide
Extrachromosomal Inheritance
Slide 2: Introduction to Extrachromosomal Inheritance
Definition: Extrachromosomal inheritance refers to the transmission of genetic material that is not found within the nucleus.
Key Components: Involves genes located in mitochondria, chloroplasts, and plasmids.
Slide 3: Mitochondrial Inheritance
Mitochondria: Organelles responsible for energy production.
Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA): Circular DNA molecule found in mitochondria.
Inheritance Pattern: Maternally inherited, meaning it is passed from mothers to all their offspring.
Diseases: Examples include Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON) and mitochondrial myopathy.
Slide 4: Chloroplast Inheritance
Chloroplasts: Organelles responsible for photosynthesis in plants.
Chloroplast DNA (cpDNA): Circular DNA molecule found in chloroplasts.
Inheritance Pattern: Often maternally inherited in most plants, but can vary in some species.
Examples: Variegation in plants, where leaf color patterns are determined by chloroplast DNA.
Slide 5: Plasmid Inheritance
Plasmids: Small, circular DNA molecules found in bacteria and some eukaryotes.
Features: Can carry antibiotic resistance genes and can be transferred between cells through processes like conjugation.
Significance: Important in biotechnology for gene cloning and genetic engineering.
Slide 6: Mechanisms of Extrachromosomal Inheritance
Non-Mendelian Patterns: Do not follow Mendel’s laws of inheritance.
Cytoplasmic Segregation: During cell division, organelles like mitochondria and chloroplasts are randomly distributed to daughter cells.
Heteroplasmy: Presence of more than one type of organellar genome within a cell, leading to variation in expression.
Slide 7: Examples of Extrachromosomal Inheritance
Four O’clock Plant (Mirabilis jalapa): Shows variegated leaves due to different cpDNA in leaf cells.
Petite Mutants in Yeast: Result from mutations in mitochondrial DNA affecting respiration.
Slide 8: Importance of Extrachromosomal Inheritance
Evolution: Provides insight into the evolution of eukaryotic cells.
Medicine: Understanding mitochondrial inheritance helps in diagnosing and treating mitochondrial diseases.
Agriculture: Chloroplast inheritance can be used in plant breeding and genetic modification.
Slide 9: Recent Research and Advances
Gene Editing: Techniques like CRISPR-Cas9 are being used to edit mitochondrial and chloroplast DNA.
Therapies: Development of mitochondrial replacement therapy (MRT) for preventing mitochondrial diseases.
Slide 10: Conclusion
Summary: Extrachromosomal inheritance involves the transmission of genetic material outside the nucleus and plays a crucial role in genetics, medicine, and biotechnology.
Future Directions: Continued research and technological advancements hold promise for new treatments and applications.
Slide 11: Questions and Discussion
Invite Audience: Open the floor for any questions or further discussion on the topic.
Richard's entangled aventures in wonderlandRichard Gill
Since the loophole-free Bell experiments of 2020 and the Nobel prizes in physics of 2022, critics of Bell's work have retreated to the fortress of super-determinism. Now, super-determinism is a derogatory word - it just means "determinism". Palmer, Hance and Hossenfelder argue that quantum mechanics and determinism are not incompatible, using a sophisticated mathematical construction based on a subtle thinning of allowed states and measurements in quantum mechanics, such that what is left appears to make Bell's argument fail, without altering the empirical predictions of quantum mechanics. I think however that it is a smoke screen, and the slogan "lost in math" comes to my mind. I will discuss some other recent disproofs of Bell's theorem using the language of causality based on causal graphs. Causal thinking is also central to law and justice. I will mention surprising connections to my work on serial killer nurse cases, in particular the Dutch case of Lucia de Berk and the current UK case of Lucy Letby.
What is greenhouse gasses and how many gasses are there to affect the Earth.moosaasad1975
What are greenhouse gasses how they affect the earth and its environment what is the future of the environment and earth how the weather and the climate effects.
Introduction:
RNA interference (RNAi) or Post-Transcriptional Gene Silencing (PTGS) is an important biological process for modulating eukaryotic gene expression.
It is highly conserved process of posttranscriptional gene silencing by which double stranded RNA (dsRNA) causes sequence-specific degradation of mRNA sequences.
dsRNA-induced gene silencing (RNAi) is reported in a wide range of eukaryotes ranging from worms, insects, mammals and plants.
This process mediates resistance to both endogenous parasitic and exogenous pathogenic nucleic acids, and regulates the expression of protein-coding genes.
What are small ncRNAs?
micro RNA (miRNA)
short interfering RNA (siRNA)
Properties of small non-coding RNA:
Involved in silencing mRNA transcripts.
Called “small” because they are usually only about 21-24 nucleotides long.
Synthesized by first cutting up longer precursor sequences (like the 61nt one that Lee discovered).
Silence an mRNA by base pairing with some sequence on the mRNA.
Discovery of siRNA?
The first small RNA:
In 1993 Rosalind Lee (Victor Ambros lab) was studying a non- coding gene in C. elegans, lin-4, that was involved in silencing of another gene, lin-14, at the appropriate time in the
development of the worm C. elegans.
Two small transcripts of lin-4 (22nt and 61nt) were found to be complementary to a sequence in the 3' UTR of lin-14.
Because lin-4 encoded no protein, she deduced that it must be these transcripts that are causing the silencing by RNA-RNA interactions.
Types of RNAi ( non coding RNA)
MiRNA
Length (23-25 nt)
Trans acting
Binds with target MRNA in mismatch
Translation inhibition
Si RNA
Length 21 nt.
Cis acting
Bind with target Mrna in perfect complementary sequence
Piwi-RNA
Length ; 25 to 36 nt.
Expressed in Germ Cells
Regulates trnasposomes activity
MECHANISM OF RNAI:
First the double-stranded RNA teams up with a protein complex named Dicer, which cuts the long RNA into short pieces.
Then another protein complex called RISC (RNA-induced silencing complex) discards one of the two RNA strands.
The RISC-docked, single-stranded RNA then pairs with the homologous mRNA and destroys it.
THE RISC COMPLEX:
RISC is large(>500kD) RNA multi- protein Binding complex which triggers MRNA degradation in response to MRNA
Unwinding of double stranded Si RNA by ATP independent Helicase
Active component of RISC is Ago proteins( ENDONUCLEASE) which cleave target MRNA.
DICER: endonuclease (RNase Family III)
Argonaute: Central Component of the RNA-Induced Silencing Complex (RISC)
One strand of the dsRNA produced by Dicer is retained in the RISC complex in association with Argonaute
ARGONAUTE PROTEIN :
1.PAZ(PIWI/Argonaute/ Zwille)- Recognition of target MRNA
2.PIWI (p-element induced wimpy Testis)- breaks Phosphodiester bond of mRNA.)RNAse H activity.
MiRNA:
The Double-stranded RNAs are naturally produced in eukaryotic cells during development, and they have a key role in regulating gene expression .
This presentation explores a brief idea about the structural and functional attributes of nucleotides, the structure and function of genetic materials along with the impact of UV rays and pH upon them.
Earliest Galaxies in the JADES Origins Field: Luminosity Function and Cosmic ...Sérgio Sacani
We characterize the earliest galaxy population in the JADES Origins Field (JOF), the deepest
imaging field observed with JWST. We make use of the ancillary Hubble optical images (5 filters
spanning 0.4−0.9µm) and novel JWST images with 14 filters spanning 0.8−5µm, including 7 mediumband filters, and reaching total exposure times of up to 46 hours per filter. We combine all our data
at > 2.3µm to construct an ultradeep image, reaching as deep as ≈ 31.4 AB mag in the stack and
30.3-31.0 AB mag (5σ, r = 0.1” circular aperture) in individual filters. We measure photometric
redshifts and use robust selection criteria to identify a sample of eight galaxy candidates at redshifts
z = 11.5 − 15. These objects show compact half-light radii of R1/2 ∼ 50 − 200pc, stellar masses of
M⋆ ∼ 107−108M⊙, and star-formation rates of SFR ∼ 0.1−1 M⊙ yr−1
. Our search finds no candidates
at 15 < z < 20, placing upper limits at these redshifts. We develop a forward modeling approach to
infer the properties of the evolving luminosity function without binning in redshift or luminosity that
marginalizes over the photometric redshift uncertainty of our candidate galaxies and incorporates the
impact of non-detections. We find a z = 12 luminosity function in good agreement with prior results,
and that the luminosity function normalization and UV luminosity density decline by a factor of ∼ 2.5
from z = 12 to z = 14. We discuss the possible implications of our results in the context of theoretical
models for evolution of the dark matter halo mass function.
Cancer cell metabolism: special Reference to Lactate PathwayAADYARAJPANDEY1
Normal Cell Metabolism:
Cellular respiration describes the series of steps that cells use to break down sugar and other chemicals to get the energy we need to function.
Energy is stored in the bonds of glucose and when glucose is broken down, much of that energy is released.
Cell utilize energy in the form of ATP.
The first step of respiration is called glycolysis. In a series of steps, glycolysis breaks glucose into two smaller molecules - a chemical called pyruvate. A small amount of ATP is formed during this process.
Most healthy cells continue the breakdown in a second process, called the Kreb's cycle. The Kreb's cycle allows cells to “burn” the pyruvates made in glycolysis to get more ATP.
The last step in the breakdown of glucose is called oxidative phosphorylation (Ox-Phos).
It takes place in specialized cell structures called mitochondria. This process produces a large amount of ATP. Importantly, cells need oxygen to complete oxidative phosphorylation.
If a cell completes only glycolysis, only 2 molecules of ATP are made per glucose. However, if the cell completes the entire respiration process (glycolysis - Kreb's - oxidative phosphorylation), about 36 molecules of ATP are created, giving it much more energy to use.
IN CANCER CELL:
Unlike healthy cells that "burn" the entire molecule of sugar to capture a large amount of energy as ATP, cancer cells are wasteful.
Cancer cells only partially break down sugar molecules. They overuse the first step of respiration, glycolysis. They frequently do not complete the second step, oxidative phosphorylation.
This results in only 2 molecules of ATP per each glucose molecule instead of the 36 or so ATPs healthy cells gain. As a result, cancer cells need to use a lot more sugar molecules to get enough energy to survive.
Unlike healthy cells that "burn" the entire molecule of sugar to capture a large amount of energy as ATP, cancer cells are wasteful.
Cancer cells only partially break down sugar molecules. They overuse the first step of respiration, glycolysis. They frequently do not complete the second step, oxidative phosphorylation.
This results in only 2 molecules of ATP per each glucose molecule instead of the 36 or so ATPs healthy cells gain. As a result, cancer cells need to use a lot more sugar molecules to get enough energy to survive.
introduction to WARBERG PHENOMENA:
WARBURG EFFECT Usually, cancer cells are highly glycolytic (glucose addiction) and take up more glucose than do normal cells from outside.
Otto Heinrich Warburg (; 8 October 1883 – 1 August 1970) In 1931 was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology for his "discovery of the nature and mode of action of the respiratory enzyme.
WARNBURG EFFECT : cancer cells under aerobic (well-oxygenated) conditions to metabolize glucose to lactate (aerobic glycolysis) is known as the Warburg effect. Warburg made the observation that tumor slices consume glucose and secrete lactate at a higher rate than normal tissues.
1. Being FAIR:
Enabling Reproducible
Data Science
Professor Carole Goble
The University of Manchester, UK
carole.goble@manchester.ac.uk
2018 Early Detection of Cancer Conference, OHSU, Portland, Oregon USA, 2-4 Oct 2018
3. The Learning Health System
Phenotypic
Patient Records
Patient cohort building
Patient stratification
Case notes
Discharge notes
Patient cohorts
Patient Multi-omics
Public Reference
repositories
text mining, data mining
data & vocabulary linking
data analytics
Single cell omics
Clinical genomics
Quantitative biology
e-Health
Predictive
models
Sensors Diagnostics
Biomarkers
Imaging
Research Clinical
Biobanks
Scientific
Literature
Patient
Public Health
[Friedman]
5. Barriers to Cure
• Access to scientific resources
• Coordination,Collaboration
• Flow of Information
• FAIR Data, FAIR Methods
• FAIR Object Commons
[Josh Sommer]
GobleC., De Roure D., Bechhofer S. (2013) AcceleratingScientists’ KnowledgeTurns, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37186-8_1
Research Commons
Accelerate inter-lab
knowledge turns
Accumulate knowledge
6. 1. A Research Commons
“… a “cloud-based” platform where investigators can store, share, access, and interact
with digital objects (data, software, [models, SOPs], etc.) generated from …. research.
By connecting the digital objects and making them accessible, the Data Commons is
intended to allow novel scientific research that was not possible before, including
hypothesis generation, discovery, and validation.” https://commonfund.nih.gov/commons
Pooled Resources
Federated
Find andAccess
Many entry points
Data + Methods + Models
8. 3. Reuse and Reproducibility
Is hard for in vivo/vitro and
even for in silico analysis
• OS version
• Revision of scripts
• Data analysis software
versions
• Version of data files
• Command line parameters
written on a napkin
• “Magic” the grad student
knows….
[Keiichiro Ono, Scripps Institute]
10. FAIR
provenance
portability
preservation
robustness
access
description
standards, common APIs
licensing
standards,
common metadata
versioning, deviation
variation sensitivity
discrepancy handling
parametric spaces
packaging, containers
dependencies
steps
ids
Reproduce and reuse
computations
Transparently communicate
the way computations are
performed
Disambiguate interpretation
of inputs/parameters/results
Safely (re)run computations
ported onto different
platforms
Human and computer
readable definitions for the
provenance of computation,
types for the data and results
13. Objects: data + methods + models + provenance +
Scharm M,Wendland F, Peters M,Wolfien M,TheileT,Waltemath D SEMS, University of Rostock zip-like file with a manifest & metadata
- Bundle files - Keep provenance
- Exchange data - Ship results
Bergmann, F.T. (2014). COMBINE archive and OMEX format: one file to share all information
to reproduce a modeling project. BMC bioinformatics,15(1), 1.
Combine Archive
Systems Biology
Systems Medicine
https://sems.unirostock.de/projects/combinearchive/
14. Research Object Framework
Bechhofer et al (2013)Why linked data is not enough for scientists https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2011.08.004
Bechhofer et al (2010) Research Objects:Towards Exchange and Reuse of Digital Knowledge, https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/268555/
carry machine
processable metadata
in common and specific
to different object
types.
bundle together and
relate digital
resources with their
context into a unit.
snapshot, cite,
exchange
run, evolve
accumulate
interlink
Standards-based generic
metadata framework
16. • Co-localizing massive
genomics datasets, like The
Cancer Genomics Atlas,
alongside secure and
scalable computational
resources to analyze them.
• Analyze own data alongside
TCGA using predefined
analytical workflows or
your own tools.
• Petabyte of multi-
dimensional data available
to authorized researchers.
• Fully reproducible
execution
• Secure team collaboration.
http://www.cancergenomicscloud.org/
NCI Cancer Genomics Cloud (CGC) Pilot
17. HTS pipelines for precision medicine
GATK:Tumor-Normal Paired Exome-Sequencing pipeline
[Durga Addepalli, Seven Bridges]
18. HTS pipelines for precision medicine
GATK:Tumor-Normal Paired Exome-Sequencing pipeline
[Durga Addepalli, Seven Bridges]
Inputs OutputsAnalysis
23. Open standards,
commodity systems
Describe and run workflows, and the
command line tools they orchestrate,
supporting containers to be portable,
transparent and interoperable .
Describe the workflow inputs,
outputs, tools and data with
controlled vocabularies / ontologies
EDAM
Describe the provenance of
the workflow
Software components are
containerised to be portable
Workflow systems run the CWL workflow
Gathers the CWL workflow descriptions
together with rich context and provenance
using multi-tiered descriptions
Snapshots the workflow.
Relates it to other objects.
Uses archive formats to contain the object
27. https://osf.io/h59uh/
Personalized medicine regulation
Standardize exchange of HTS workflows for regulatory submissions between
FDA, pharma, bioinformatics platform providers and researchers
Inspect and replicate the computational analytical workflow to review and
approve the bioinformatics
Domain-specific object model captures essential information without going in
details of the actual execution.
A community-driven project
Emphasis on robust, safe reuse
Technical Reproducibility
packaging software and providing
required datasets
Human understanding of what has been done
higher level steps of the workflow, their
parameter spaces and algorithm settings
Alterovitz, Dean II, Goble, Crusoe, Soiland-Reyes et al Enabling Precision Medicine via standard communication
of NGS provenance, analysis, and results, biorxiv.org, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1101/191783
28. analysis
and review
sample
archival
sequencing run
file transfer
regulation
computation
pipelines
produced files
are massive in
size
transfer is
slow
too large to keep
forever; not
standardized
difficult to
validate/verify
how can
industry and
FDA work
together to
avoid
mistakes?
HTS lifecycle: from a biological sample
to biomedical research and regulation
[Vahan Simonyan] FDA BAA contract HHSF223201510129C (PI: Raja Mazumder)
31. BioCompute Framework
to advance Regulatory Science to support NGS analysis
Emphasis on robust, safe reuse.
Describe and validate the
metadata of packages, and their
contents, both inside and outside
Standardise data formats and
elements and exchange of
Electronic Health Records
Describe and
validate analysis
workflows, to be
portable and
interoperable
Standardise and support
sharing and analysis of
Genomic data
Ontologies
Controlled vocabularies for
describing all of the above
APIs
Programmable interfaces for
accessing all of the above
Alterovitz, Dean II, Goble, Crusoe, Soiland-Reyes et al Enabling Precision Medicine via standard communication
of NGS provenance, analysis, and results, biorxiv.org, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1101/191783
33. Living Objectisms: grow, evolve, mutate
• RO life cycles
– Fixed snapshot
– Living objects
– Rot, mutate, clone
• Arose from workflow
sharing and preservation
• Research Objects are
analogous to software
artefacts and practices
rather than data or
articles
Snapshot Fork
Combine
36. Container Profile
Under the hood building blocks:
metadata that describes metadata
general purpose to drive scalable infrastructure
Manifest
Construction
Profile
Construction
IDENTIFIER
37. Many other kinds of objects
Multiple object types in an
investigation
Structured collections of objects
Physical objects, SOPs
These examples wereWorkflow Objects…
[Sansone]
Asthma Research e-Lab
[Phil Crouch, John
Ainsworth, Iain Buchan]
38. Chard et al: I'll take that to go: Big data bags and minimal identifiers for exchange of large, complex datasets, https://doi.org/10.1109/BigData.2016.7840618
Dnase HypersensitivityAnalysis
using ENCODE (Encyclopedia of
DNA Elements ) access, analysis
and publishing using Galaxy
images and
genome sequences
assembled from diverse
repositories
data distributed across
multiple locations,
referenced because big
and persisted, efficiently
and safely moved on
demand
Assemble and share large scale, multi-element
datasets.
[Chard, Kesselman, Foster, Madduri, 2016]
39. Richly structured
descriptions of content in the bag and outside it
Transfer and archive very large HTS datasets in a location-
independent way. Secure referencing and moving of patient data.
Big Data
collections of
arbitrary
referenced
content
annotations,
provenance,
relations
checksums
Simple, location independent
persistent identifiers
Define a dataset and its contents by enumerating its elements, regardless of their location
Verify and validate content
40. FAIR Data Commons
3. Everything is a research object: all
the (distributed) components of an
investigation (models, data,
pipelines, SOPs, provenance...) into
citable, exchangeable, publishable,
preserved, nested objects
1. Assemble and share
large scale, multi-
element datasets.
Secure referencing and
moving of patient data.
2. Reproduce, port,
share, and execute
HTS pipelines (and
other analytics …)
41. The Knowledge Object Reference Ontology (KORO): A formalism to support management and
sharing of computable biomedical knowledge for learning health systems
Flynn, Friedman, Boisvert, Landis‐Lewis, Lagoze (2018), https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.10054
Graphs of Research
Objects
Track Research
Objects
Combine and enrich
Research Objects
Learning Health Systems
42. International Efforts:
FAIR Life Science Data Infrastructure
• EGA in a Box for storing,
coordinating and distributing
human data
• Human Data Beacons discovery
service
• Authentication and
Authorization Infrastructure
Interoperability, Compute, Data,
Tools,Training
Tools andWorkflow collaboratory
for EOSC
https://www.elixir-europe.org/use-cases/human-data
43. Summary: help knowledge turning
• Data Science is underpinned by data
access + transparent methods to
enable reproducible and FAIR
knowledge exchange.
• FAIR First.
• Research Objects as the currency of
reproducibility and exchange
• A bunch of tech, standards, tooling,
best practices, grass roots and
international activities going on.
• Tech isn’t the issue.
• e-Infrastructure matters. Please care
about it.
45. Melissa Haendel, PhD
Director of Translational Data Science, Oregon
State University
Director of the Center for Data to Health,
Oregon Health & Science University
46. Acknowledgements
Barend Mons
Sean Bechhofer
Matthew Gamble
Raul Palma
Jun Zhao
Mark Robinson
AlanWilliams
Norman Morrison
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Tim Clark
Alejandra Gonzalez-Beltran
Philippe Rocca-Serra
Ian Cottam
Susanna Sansone
KristianGarza
Daniel Garijo
Catarina Martins
Iain Buchan
Michael Crusoe
Rob Finn
Carl Kesselman
Ian Foster
Kyle Chard
Vahan Simonyan
Ravi Madduri
Raja Mazumder
GilAlterovitz,
Denis Dean II
Durga Addepalli
Wouter Haak
Anita De Waard
Paul Groth
Oscar Corcho
Josh Sommer
Project ID: 675728