©STFC/Keith G JefferyELPUB 2007 Keynote 20070427 1 Technical Infrastructure and PolicyFramework for Maximising the Benefits from Research Output Keith.

©STFC/Keith G Jeffery ELPUB 2007 Keynote 20070427 1

Technical Infrastructureand

PolicyFramework for

Maximising the Benefits from

Research OutputKeith G JefferyScience and Technology Facilities CouncilRutherford Appleton Laboratory, OX11 0QX UKe-mail: [email protected]


Structure1. Introduction2. Maximising Benefits from Research Output3. Technical Infrastructure4. Policy Framework5. The Way Forward6. Conclusion


2006-

Director, IT & International Strategy

1999-2006

Director IT & Head BITD

(IT, library, photorepro; > 1000 servers, 360000 users)


•18 European countries - major labs or consortia of universities•12000 ICT researchers

• Working groups• Fellows programme• Cor Baayen Award

•Strategy documents for EC and national governments•R&D projects, networks of excellence etc•> 100 spin-out companies•European Office(s) of W3C•ERCIM Newswww.ercim.org

ERCIMEuropean Research Consortiumfor Informatics and Mathematics


Linking together systems in each country managing research information

– Funders of research– Organisations performing research

For– Strategic decision-making about what research to fund /do– Finding research partners and competitors– Finding innovative ideas for technology transfer / exploitation– Informing the media / public

CERIF: EU recommendation to member stateswww.eurocris.org




Requirement

ActorsResearcherResearch ManagerFunding AgencyPolicymakerInnovatorEducatorStudentMedia

RolesReview existing material ideas, techniquesEvaluation researcher, organisationSearch for innovative ideasDiscover teaching materialInput to ‘stories’ for public interest, ethics


RequirementUser:

FastEasyHomogeneousSharingLegalCost-effective

middleware

application

Technical:

GRIDs

Formalised metadata

Canonical syntax/semantics


Benefits

•Faster research turnround – more progress•Originator improved quality – access & review•Community improved quality – access & review•Improved innovation•Improved education•Improved public engagement•Improved PR for institution•=> wealth creation / quality of life improvement


Scenario

middlewareapplication

CRISproject, person, organisational unit, research output (products, patents, publications), funding, facilities, equipment, events……e-Research repositoryresearch datasets, software

e-Researchcontrol experiments, take data, visualistaion, in-silico experiments (simulation)

e-ProcessWorkflows, research applications, travel requests, claims

Not only work with the e-literature repository but also…..


Scenario

middlewareapplication

CRISproject, person, organisational unit, research output (products, patents, publications), funding, facilities, equipment, events……e-Research repositoryresearch datasets, software

e-Researchcontrol experiments, take data, visualistaion, in-silico experiments (simulation)

e-ProcessWorkflows, research applications, travel requests, claims

Not only work with the e-literature repository but also…..




Technical Infrastructure

e-infrastructure CRISRepositoriesMetadata & CurationIntegration


The GRIDs Architecture

Knowledge Layer

Information Layer

Computation / Data LayerDat

a to

Kno

wle

dge

Control


A POSSIBLE ARCHITECTURE

U:USER

S:SOURCE R:RESOURCE

Rm:ResourceMetadata

Ra:ResourceAgent

Ua:User Agent

Um:User Metadata

Sm:SourceMetadata

Sa:Source Agent brokers

The GRIDs Environment


NGG1 Requirements•Transparent and reliable

•Open to wide user and provider communities•Pervasive and ubiquitous•Secure and provide trust across multiple administrative domains•Easy to use and to program•Persistent•Based on standards for software and protocols•Person-centric•Scalable•Easy to configure and manage


NGG2

NGG1 left some undefined research areasCall2 projects did not address all areas of research opportunityNGG2 convened to update the vision:

– Particularly security / trust– Particularly self-* properties– Particularly semantic description of components

Report September 2004


Application A Application B Application C

Grids Middleware Services Needed for A

Grids Middleware Services Needed for B

Grids Middleware Services Needed for C

Grids Foundations for Operating System X

Grids Foundations For Operating System Y

Operating System X

Operating System Y

Grids Operating System(including Foundations)Modular and dynamically loadable

NGG2 Architecture


NGG2 Problems

•Layering architecture complex; need more flexibility•Require functional software components• - easy, fast development• - re-use


NGG3: SOKUInterfaces

ComputingInfrastructure

Services

Non SOKU

Non SOKU

Non SOKU

Non SOKU


SOKU

Descriptive metadataRestrictive metadata

Functional program code

Descriptive metadata

Restrictive metadata


Descriptive metadata

Restrictive metadata









Composed SOKUSOKU





The R&D Process

Workprogramme

Proposal

Project

Results

Exploitation

WealthCreation

Note:

some CRIS developers limit recording of outputs from the process to areas indicated

Nirvana


PROJECT

ORGUNIT

Skills

CV

GeneralFacility

ParticularEquipment

ContactResults

PublicationResultsPatentResultsProduct

Service

FundingProgramme

Event

ClassificationPrize/Award

PERSON

CERIF: EU Recommendation to Member States


PROJECT

ORGUNITPERSON

Result_Publication

Can Express: (where DT-date/time)Person A (DT1 - DT2) (is author of) Publication XOrgunit O (DT1 - DT2) (is owner of IPR in) Publication XPerson A (DT1 - DT2) (is employee of ) Orgunit OPerson A (DT1 - DT2) (is project leader of) Project PPerson A (DT1-DT2) (is member of) Orgunit MPerson A (DT1-DT2) (is member of) Orgunit NOrgunit M (DT1-DT2) (is part of) Orgunit OOrgunit N (DT1-DT2) (is part of) Orgunit O

Secondary Base Entities: example: RESULT_PUBLICATION


Result_PublicationInstance Diagram

Person A

Publication X

OrgUnit O

OrgUnit M

OrgUnit N

Project P

member

member

employee

Part of

Part of

owns IPR

author

Project leader


Result_PublicationInstance Diagram

Person A

Publication X

OrgUnit O

OrgUnit M

OrgUnit N

Project P

member

member

employee

Part of

Part of

owns IPR

author

Project leader

repository

HR System

webpages

webpages

ProjectManagement

Finance

CERIF encourages interfacing to external systems





Repositories

•Document / article repositories• - simple metadata (discovery, description)• - ePrints, DSpace, Fedora, ePubs….•e-Research repositories• - more complex metadata (discovery, description, usage control, software parameters…)• - ‘homebrew’ systems – portals to research datasets and software



E-infrastructure CRISRepositoriesMetadata & CurationIntegration


Classification of Metadata

data (document)

SCHEMA NAVIGATIONAL ASSOCIATIVE

how to

get it

constrain it

view to users


Classification of Metadata

data (document)

SCHEMA NAVIGATIONAL ASSOCIATIVE

how to

get it

constrain it

view to users

Metadata must have formal syntax and semantics to be machine-understandable as well as machine-readable


Dublin Core

Simple DCelements, some syntax, no semantics

Qualified DCbetter syntax, namespaces

More Recent proposals (2007)abstract data model, RDF


DC ProblemsIn parallel (1999-present) criticism of DC:

1. Syntax and semantics not sufficiently formal2. <creator>,<contributor>,<publisher> are ROLES of person or

organisational unit not base entities3. <relation> : extremely general4. <source> : is a variant of a role-based relationship

object<>object5. <coverage> recently separated into geographic and temporal

but needs formalisation

Formalised version of DC proposed, considered, now in CERIFNote: recent (2007) work on DC and SWAP (JISC) going in this

direction


Publications

UniqueId

Subject

Keywords

Description

Resource Type

Coverage Temporal

Coverage Spatial

Title

Person OrgUnit

Security

Privacy

AccessLevel

Charge

Annotation

Classification

Domain of CERIF

Restrictive

Quality Assessment

Project

ResourceIdentifier

Descriptive

Navigational


But the problem with metadata is

It takes too much effort for the researcher to put it in (many web-form-screens)

So have to input incrementally, no repetition, using the workflow.. And not re-keying data stored already elsewhere in other (linked-up) systems


Progressive RecordingGrey Document

Greydoc

Publicationmetadata

Person

Project

OrgUnit

new


Progressive RecordingWhite document

Greydoc

Publicationmetadata

Person

Project

OrgUnit

Whitedoc

Publicationmetadata

new


Curation

Problem•fast changing media – need media conversion•digital fading – need for refresh•metadata to understand later

AnswerOAIS : but provides only an architecture: no interoperation metadata





CRIS + Repositories at 1 institution

CRISResearch Context

[projects, persons, organisational unitsfunding, products, patents, publications

facilities, equipment, events]

OA Repository(hypermedia) Documents

e-Research repositoryDatasets and Software

OAI-PMH

Various

protocols

End-User

CERIFCERIF


….and multiple institutions

CRIS

OA repository

e-Researchrepository

CRIS

OA repository


CRIS

OA repository


End-User End-User End-User

Institution A Institution B Institution C


CERIF-CRIS at the Centre

Portal with knowledge-assisted user interface

Digital Curation Facility

SCIENTIFIC DATASETS

Data

Information

Knowledge

PUBLICATIONS

Data

Information

Knowledge metadata

publish

validate

GRIDs

Ambient, Pervasive Access


CERIF-CRIS : Enhancing and Enabling

CRIS

FinanceHuman

Resources

Project Management

Publications

Patents

Products




PolicyOA Benefits

•Ethics: public access to publicly funded research

•Research Impact: greater access and use

•Costs and economic benefit: reduced costs and clear benefits to economy of open access

•Metrics: easier to get real metrics of usage

•Added value: link OA repositories to CRIS etc

•Just reward: overcomes publishers profiting from scholarly work provided free


PolicyBarriers to OA

•Loss of publisher income: publishers fear catastrophic cancellations of subscriptions

•Copyright: transfer author publisher so cannot re-use (in fact mostly can)

•Access Difficulties: DC metadata insufficient

•Completeness: 8-15% fill: need mandates and better workflowed input/update systems


Policy

•Many OA declarations (Budapest onwards)•Increasing use of green institutional OA repositories – publisher permissions (embargoes)•Publishers offering OA – but author/institution pays (gold)Note: for highly productive institutions gold costs more than subscription models


MandatesProgressively more mandates – institutional and funding organisations

The preferred, optimal and recommended procedure is :•immediately upon acceptance for publication the metadata and full article are deposited in an institutional repository. •If the publisher does not demand an embargo period both are set to open access; •if an embargo period is demanded then only the metadata is made visible until the end of the embargo period. •Of course, associated with the metadata record there can be (and ePrints provides) a ‘request button’ so that the material can be sent automatically to any researcher who requests it under the usual ‘fair use’ conditions.


Integration

Need all funding organisations to mandate OA in institutional repositories

Resistance from publishers (including learned societies as publishers)Engage with them to find new business models




Way Forward

We cannot allow progress to be delayed by particular commercial interests

Their commercial interests are not above the public need for improved wealth creation and quality of life


Speculation•Author deposits in green OA IR•Push technology informs learned society•Referees access and record reviews•Learned society places ‘kitemark’

Or anyone can referee and record review?

Note: JISC OJIMS (Overlay Journal Infrastructure for Meterological Sciences) exploring this space from March 2007




Take-home message

Despite protests and obstacles to improved access to research material over the centuries from religious, commercial, professional or labour groups, none delayed for long progress to meet the requirement as defined by the research community.

Electronic publishing must take its place in the modern world of integrated e-infrastructure, research output, CRIS.

All within the new e-research environment


Prof. Keith G Jeffery CEng, CITP, FBCS, FGS, HFICSDirector, IT & International Strategy

Science and Technology Facilities CouncilRutherford Appleton Laboratory

[email protected]

©STFC/Keith G JefferyELPUB 2007 Keynote 20070427 1 Technical Infrastructure and PolicyFramework for Maximising the Benefits from Research Output Keith.

Documents

stfckeith g jefferyelpub

research applications

research partners

research output products

conclusion slide

mathematics slide

ethics slide

maximising benefits