2018 Accepted Contributions | Open Science Conference

Accepted contributions of the Open Science Conference 2018

Following is the list of all accepted contributions of the Open Science Conference 2018 including a scientific justification for their acceptance based on the reviewers’ comments. The shown rating values are the average of three to four independent reviews.

1. RENGA, an open-source, highly scalable platform fostering cooperation in data science
Rok Roskar¹, Eric Bouillet¹, Luc Henry²^,Olivier Verscheure¹
¹Swiss Data Science Center / ETH Zurich & EPFL
²Presidency / EPFL

The contribution presents the open data science platform RENGA (implemented in Python) that includes solutions to several problems of open data. The platform materializes data lineage into a knowledge graph representation that serves as the basis for traceability of research. The topic of this contribution is very suitable for the OSC community and proposes a very good application for open science and open data.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 8,0

2. Genomics For Everyone
Christine Mannhalter¹, Elisabeth Simboeck¹
¹CeMM and Genom Austria

The presentation describes a FAIR database of human genomes in Austria, a topic, which is highly relevant to the OSC. With Genom Austria the authors present a highly relevant project handling valuable datasets to improve insights into human genomics. The project showcases best practice examples for data management and for difficult questions surrounding personal data and openness. The authors address the important aspect of education regarding new technologies and data sensitivity and present concepts to better involve citizens and decision makers in the research process. Thus, the presentation is of high importance for the OSC 2018.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 7,5

3. FORSbase – Implementing the FAIR principles for social science data archives
Stefan Buerli¹
¹FORS

The contribution presents the web application FORSbase that makes social science data as open as possible and supports researchers through the entire data life cycle. One innovative aspect is that FORSbase allows researchers to choose between different degrees of openness, as it is often necessary for data from social sciences. Such examples are highly valuable for putting the FAIR principles into practice. Furthermore, interoperability with other social science data archives and research information systems is provided. By this, the project covers the conference topic very well.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 7,2

4. FAIRization: What qualifies a search engine for distributed research data?
Timo Borst¹, Anastasia Kazakova¹, Atif Latif¹, Fidan Limani¹
¹ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics

This presentation describes the development of a search engine for research data, which not only copies the algorithms of conventional search engines, but is also optimized for research data queries. The novel approach uses additional forms of contextual information (“proxies”) and can help to introduce a “judgment of relevance” within scientific discovery engines. Thus, it can provide a significant service for querying suitable research data. Solutions to improve the retrieval of research data are highly relevant and FAIRization seems of special interest for the community of the OSC 2018.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 7,0

5. RDMO – Research Data Management Organiser
Jochen Klar¹, Olaf Michaelis1, Harry Enke¹, Janine Vierheller², Heike Neuroth², Kerstin Wedlich³, Frank Tristram³, Claudia Kramer^3,Jens Ludwig⁴
¹Leibniz Institute for Astrophysics Potsdam (AIP)
²Fachhochschule Potsdam (FHP)
³Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
⁴DINI/nestor-AG Digitale Forschungsdaten

This contribution presents an important tool for researchers to structure the data management process. RDMO is designed for the data management process during the whole project and can be adapted to various situations. The open source approach of RDMO does especially considerate the installation by institutions and universities and its adaptation for discipline-specific or institutional needs. Thus, the contribution provides a valuable new tool of high interest for the community of the OSC 2018.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 6,8

6. OpenAIRE: supporting the EC’s Open Data Pilot in H2020
Sarah Jones¹, Marjan Grootveld², Elly Dijk², Ellen Leenarts², Ilaria Fava³
¹University of Glasgow
²DANS-KNAW
³Göttingen State and University Library

OpenAIRE2020 aims to provide data access and to foster reuse of data. It is embedded in the third phase of OpenAIRE which focuses on research data management, data archiving, and sharing practices. In particular, the project presents the results of a survey on the European Commission’s approach to data management plans. The survey dealt FAIR principles for research data, discipline-specific guidelines, and common standards for data management plans. OpenAIRE supports the implementation of the EC’s requirements and recommendations on open access and open research data through its network. As such, a presentation on their recent survey on the European Commission’s approach to data management plans is highly valuable for the OSC 2018.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 6,8

7. 750 Volunteers Transcribing 31,000 Pages with 8.5 million Entries Online – an Evaluation
Jesper Zedlitz¹, Norbert Luttenberger¹
¹University of Kiel

The proposal describes a crowdsourcing project to generate research and metadata. It is a technological and organizational approach to guarantee in-depth indexing of digital artifacts for scientific usage and represents a prototypical crowdsourced in-depth-indexing project. The approach is very innovative and provided good experience to facilitate the work of researchers. Thus, it is highly relevant for the community of the OSC 2018.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 6,3

8. CESSDA’s Stepping Stones in Realising the FAIR principles
Ron Dekker¹
¹CESSDA

The Consortium of European Social Science data Archives (CESSDA) provides an innovative approach to support the FAIR principles. In particular, CESSDA’s submission is of interest, because it represents many important data centers in Europe – not just a project or a single service. CESSDA states that one of their key challenges is using the FAIR principles by taking into account the distributive infrastructure within social sciences and the sensitivity of man social science data. To hear how CESSDA’s realized the findability of social sciences’ research data is promising and of high interest for the OSC 2018.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 6,0

9. Preprints Servers as a Hub for Early Stage Research Outputs
Martyn Rittman¹
¹MDPI AG

In 2017, several new subject-specific preprint servers have started their work. The presentation aims to compare preprint servers and their services, such as linking to the paper’s additional research output (e.g. data and code). This is an important discussion towards standards for subject-specific preprint servers and their contribution to Open Science. Lack of standards in several areas is preventing wider acceptance of open science methods. This study contributes to greater transparency by comparing the strategies of different preprint services with a focus on additional sources and materials. Overall, the presentation addresses an important question in the open science ecosystem and thereby, the contribution is highly valuable for the OSC 2018.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 6,0

10. How Research libraries can build on the EOSC to support scientific communities
Ilaria Fava¹, Valentino Cavalli²
¹Göttingen State and University Library
²LIBER

The contribution describes detailed activities within the EOSCpilot (European Open Science Cloud for Research Pilot Project) which is an important activity to approach research data management challenges especially in multinational scenarios. The presented setup of 15 science demonstrators as well as interviews appears crucial to bring together both worlds of service providers and data creators and (re-)users. The EOSCpilot addresses extremely relevant topics (landscape of existing infrastructures and training plus the governance model). In addition, the science demonstrators put the researchers in the center of the discussion and could help to foster the cultural change to Open Science/FAIR data. The OSC 2018 will benefit from this presentation, because it will shed light on the researchers` attitudes.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 6,0

11. Humanities data sharing: An exploration of conceptual approaches for data journals
Edit Gorogh¹, Birgit Schmidt¹
¹University of Göttingen

The abstract focuses on initial results of a pilot study in the context of the EU project OpenUP, which evaluates how quality assessment and (open) peer review can be applied to research data in the humanities. These are very relevant topics with respect to research data management and this project can give valuable insights into the humanities as well input towards implementing FAIR data principles. The project is further well-integrated with other large-scale efforts such as DARIAH-EU (Digital Research Infrastructure for the Arts and Humanities).

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 6,0

12. The Connections between online post-publication peer review and retractions
Hadas Shema¹ and Isabella Peters¹
¹ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics

The submission focuses on the need for transparency in scientific communication as one of the major goals in open science. The research question is if post-publication peer review based on discussions in social media and other platforms is effective in detecting flaws in scholarly works, which could lead to a retraction of said work. Indeed this work could contribute to accept that many forms of post-publication peer review are very valuable, because such feedback channels could be used in altmetrics and could prevent the citing of retracted (or to be retracted) papers in the future. Generally, evidence-based research on open peer review services and tools is still a neglected area in the open science discourse.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 5,8

13. Getting closer to the researcher’s desk – from acquisition and management to publishing scientific data
Stephan Mäs¹, Daniel Henzen¹, Lars Bernard¹
¹TU Dresden

The abstract presents an architecture for the Collaborative Early Warning Information Systems for Urban Infrastructures (COLABIS) which aims to provide research data management for the whole research data life cycle. The implementation of the software architecture seems to comply with state-of-the-art standards. It is a best practice candidate to facilitate data sharing and management that should be discussed in different discipline specific communities for common use.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 5,5

14. Researcher Identifiers, Metadata and Scholarly Communication in the Linked Data Environment: The Implication for University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Anchalee Panigabutra-Roberts¹
¹University of Tennessee, Knoxville

This abstract describes a study to evaluate different researcher identification systems and their metadata to define a metadata model for a linked data environment that is inclusive of metadata from such diverse systems. It is a well-chosen topic and approach, which is at the very core of an infrastructure for Open Science. Researcher identification management is a key element of the linked open data landscape. A study that evaluates a broad field of different systems is highly relevant. Although it has a focus on the US and excludes discipline-specific systems it will help others to understand the issues and how the resulting metadata model can be applied to other institutions.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 5,3

15. Tracking open research data re-use in scholarly journal papers
Stephanie van de Sandt¹, Maxi Kindling¹
¹Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

This submission describes a research project that aims at tracking data re-use in scholarly articles through different methods, including text mining. This is especially interesting as research has shown that the overwhelming majority of data sets are not formally cited. By analyzing the context of data re-use and the properties of the mentioned datasets, the project should also shed further light into findability and accessibility data sets. Thus, empirical findings of data citation practices and methods to track data re-use should be presented and discussed at OSC 2018.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 5,3

16. FOSTER Plus – Fostering the practical implementation of Open Science in Horizon 2020 and beyond
Helene Brinken¹, Joy Davidson², Birgit Schmidt¹
¹Goettingen State and University Library
²University of Glasgow, Digital Curation Centre (DCC)

The authors aim to present two training resources of the FOSTER Plus project for Open Science: 1) a handbook and 2) an e-learning course. The abstract shows a broad perspective on the issue of open data (beyond research data management in a narrower sense) as it includes for example open access publishing, open peer review and open source software and workflows. This adds to its innovative value and practical relevance. Discipline specific problems are addressed as well, which is strongly required by scientific communities. Thus, the author’s work is of high practical relevance for the conference.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 5,0

17. The Open Archives of Knowledge-Data Experiment at University of Strasbourg
Stéphanie Cheviron¹, Adeline Rege¹
¹Université de Strasbourg

This abstract describes the support of an ambitious goal, namely making all research outputs of University of Strasbourg open by default. It presents the user-driven, multi-stakeholder approach adopted by the university, which helps to identify best practices and to facilitate acceptance by researchers. The project seems to have a clear aim and describes a series of useful steps based on observing researchers in their approach to open science. The collaboration between several departments to involve relevant stakeholders and the consideration of organizational structures additional to technical implementations underlines its practical relevance and valuable contribution to OSC 2018.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 4,8

18. Open Science as-a-Service for research communities: preliminary results and use cases from the OpenAIRE-Connect project
Pedro Príncipe¹, Paolo Manghi², Natalia Manola³
¹University of Minho
²CNR-ISTI
³University of Athens

The authors present two services (called “OSaaS” – “Open Science as a Service”) in the context of the EU project OpenAIRE: 1) A service to enable communities to publish research artifacts (packages and links) 2) A service to monitor the impact of those packages. It is a nice proposal depicting the consequences of Open Science related topics and strategies on the operational level of software based services and data modelling. In the light of a leading question like “What does Open Science practically mean?” the proposal conveys some basic insights with reference to a European Infrastructure project.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 4,8

19. Practice of Research Data Management: Findings from the IFLA LTR Project
Anna Maria Tammaro¹, Krystyna Matusiak², Vittore Casarosa³, Frank Sposito²¹University of Parma
²ISTI-CNR
³Cranfield University

The submission covers characteristic tasks and responsibilities of data curators in international and interdisciplinary contexts. It offers empirical insights on data management from data management professionals, in particular technical systems and services structured around research data, social activities, and policy initiatives. This is done by analyzing several hundred job announcements with relation to RDM plus in depth interviews with RDM experts. These insights are novel and could be helpful for many participants of the conference.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 4,8

20. A National Approach to Open Science and Research in Canada
Portia Taylor¹, Mark Leggott²¹Government of Canada
²Research Data Canada

The proposal is showcasing the national approach on Open Science and Open Data in Canada. It promises to present a few examples of use cases and best practices from a country, which is dedicated to be among the leading nations, when it comes to open science. It could be an interesting experience since the government bodies are engaged in the process and some research institutions are committed to include open science principles in their performance.

Abstract
Average reviewers ratings: 4,8

Review Board

Lidia Borrell-Damian, European University Association
Timo Borst, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
Hans-Joachim Bungartz, Technical University of Munich
Benedikt Fecher, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society
Konrad Förstner, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg
Sascha Friesike, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Edit Gorogh, Goettingen State and University Library
Christian Grimm, DFN
Wilhelm Hasselbring, Kiel University
Tamara Heck, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf
Christian Heise, Open Knowledge Foundation DE / Leuphana University
Markus Huff, German Research Institute for Adult Education (DIE)
Reiner Jung, Kiel University
Markus Konkol, University of Münster
Angelina Kraft, German National Library of Science and Technology (TIB)
Peter Kraker, Open Knowledge Maps
Dieter Kranzlmüller, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich
Harald Kusch, University Medical Center Göttingen
Igsani Labastida, Universitat de Barcelona
Andre Lampe, Freelancer
Elisabeth Lex, Graz University of Technology
Stephanie Linek, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
Natalia Manola Athena, Research and Innovation Centre
Philipp Mayr, GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
Athanasios Mazarakis, Kiel University & ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
Alexia Meyermann, German Institute for International Educational Research (DIPF)
Julika Mimkes, University Library Goettingen
Peter Mutschke, GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
Astrid Orth, University Library Goettingen
Isabella Peters, Kiel University & ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
Cornelius Puschmann, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society
Matthias Razum, FIZ Karlsruhe – Leibniz Institute for Information Infrastructure
Bernd Rupp, Leibniz-Forschungsinstitut für Molekulare Pharmakologie (FMP)
Guido Scherp, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
Birgit Schmidt, Goettingen State and University Library & University of Goettingen
Jasmin Schmitz, ZB MED – Information Centre for Life Sciences
Willi Scholz, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
Jürgen Schupp, Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) in the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin)
Malvika Sharan, European Molecular Biology Laboratory
Olaf Siegert, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
Ralf Toepfer, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
Sven Vlaeminck, ZBW – Leibniz Information Centre for Economics
Doris Wedlich, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Erich Weichselgartner, Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information (ZPID)
Gabriele von Voigt, Leibniz Universität Hannover