Upload
bdlss
View
87
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Repositories for research information management
Wolfram Horstmann
CERIF-‐CRIS and Repositories, Brussels, 12/13-‐oct-‐2011
The challenge
Collaboration of researchers, administration & librarians!
http://mhpbooks.com/mobylives/?p=33681
Why CRIS & OA-‐Repositories?
“Given their affinity, achieving interoperability between CRIS
and OAR is desirable and will benefit all parties involved, including the researchers. A joint approach will avoid
double input and management of redundant data as well as redundant services and processes and will both
enhance the efficiency and quality (mutual enrichment) of the services offered by CRIS and OAR to their users.”
January 2007: Knowledge Exchange DEFF, DFG, JISC, SURF
Exchanging Research Information -‐-‐ Razum, Simons & Horstmann [>> Text]
The Task
• There is still an assumed competition between CRIS and OARs and many other institutional systems
• CRIS and OARs should join forces to deliver the best possible services
• An account of „Who does what and how?“ should be developed
Delineation: Characteristics
• Current Research Information Systems CRIS – administrative, sensitive, comprehensive, integrative, local, analytic | administrators
• Open Access Repositories OAR
– public, file-‐centric, rights, preservation, globally distributed paradigm | librarians
• Bibliography Management System BMS
– CV oriented, complete, representative | researchers
Delineation: Commonalities
• Bibliographic Information
– Title, Source, Subject, Keywords, Rights, Authorship…
• Affiliation
– Author Identity, Institute, Organisational Unit, Research Group, Time Frame…
• Project Information “short-‐term affiliation“
– Time Frame, Funder, Participants, Budgets…
Delineation: Differences
• CRIS more local, while OARs distributed • CRIS: Financial information
– Budgets of projects, staff • CRIS: Staff information
– Employment details, costs
• OAR: Full-‐Text Management – Access Rights, Identifiers, Preservation, Compound Objects / Research Data …
System Habitat
• CRIS and OAR potentially – Financial System – Human Resource Management – Facility Management System – Campus Management System – Bibliographic Databases
• WoS, Scopus, ArXiV, PMC, IRs/BASE
– Authoritative Data Resources /Disambiguation • Vocabularies, Ontologies, ORCID/AuthorClaim
• Massive common interoperability requirements
‚Species‘
• CRIS proper – CERIF-‐centric: self or METIS, PURE, CONVERIS – Integrating with institutional HRM, project & financial systems
• OAR proper – DCES , MODS etc | DSPACE, E-‐Prints, Fedora
• BMS intermediates – Proprietary, MODS: DSPACE, E-‐Prints, Invenio, LUP, etc.
• Aggregative Approaches – Sharing and re-‐using resources
A CRIS
AVEDAS AG, CONVERIS SYSTEM
An OAR
ePrints Southhampton
Further Trends in OARs
• Extension towards BMS / Reporting
– Demand for authoritative resources increases – Usage of vocabularies, ontologies, e.g. SPAR – Usage of web services, linked data – Personal displays, CV-‐Systems
• Extension towards Research Data – Demand for collaboration with researchers incresases
• Repositories as embedded systems – local and global integration
Research Data & Enhanced Publications
http://www.ukpmc.co.uk
Semantic Web Approaches
OpenAIRE and KE CRIS-‐OAR Interoperability Project
Interim Conclusion
• Neither CRIS nor OARs are autonomous – Rather open, interrelated data mgmt. systems
• Any individual solution will be different – Depending on the local system habitat
• Systems level not the correct approach? – Rather consider human curation responsibilities
Curation processes
• Persons – e.g. Human resource office, IT department (IDM)
• Finance – e.g. Finance office
• Units – e.g. Facility/Campus Management
• Projects – e.g. Research office, Researchers
• Bibliographic Information – e.g. Library, Researchers
The curation view on CRIS & OARs
• Treatment of systems as curation tools maintained by specialists
– Research project manager, financial officer, staff manager, bibliography specialist, data librarian, web content manager, identity manager, analyst
• No requirement to build integrated IT-‐‚columns‘ – Rather distributed systems view – Reporting as distributed queries with display – Data model may differ in systems, while entities, properties and vocabularies are aligned to interoperate on the aggregation/reporting level
Conclusion
• Convergence between CRIS and OAR – both head towards aggregative systems – OARs become ‚sensitive‘ e.g. Bibliometrics, Research Data
– CRIS become public e.g. CV displays, full-‐text
• Differences there to stay – Administrators as end-‐users for CRIS – Open Access as committment for OARs
• Research Information Repository / ‚CRISpository‘ already a reality
Recommendations • Put the researcher in the centre – CRIS & OARs have joint responsibility to serve research
– Even assessment exercises will only be accepted if the researchers agree on the approach taken
– Researchers are not interested in technicalities • Regard CRIS and OARs as assemblies of specialized
data curation activities – Everybody should keep on doing what he/she can do best – Systems and formats are slave to curation requirements – Inter-‐departmental collaboration is the clue (and main challenge)
– Codex: Nobody will take away responsibility of the other
And yes…
…CERIF will be the common demoninator
Thanks!