A keynote slide presentation by Mercè Crosas for the European Dataverse Workshop 2020 at UiT (University of Tromso).
Category Archives: oa.repositories.data
[1910.10096] Formalizing Privacy Laws for License Generation and Data Repository Decision Automation
Abstract: In this paper, we summarize work-in-progress on expert system support to automate some data deposit and release decisions within a data repository, and to generate custom license agreements for those data transfers. Our approach formalizes via a logic programming language the privacy-relevant aspects of laws, regulations, and best practices, supported by legal analysis documented in legal memoranda. This formalization enables automated reasoning about the conditions under which a repository can transfer data, through interrogation of users, and the application of formal rules to the facts obtained from users. The proposed system takes the specific conditions for a given data release and produces a custom data use agreement that accurately captures the relevant restrictions on data use. This enables appropriate decisions and accurate licenses, while removing the bottleneck of lawyer effort per data transfer. The operation of the system aims to be transparent, in the sense that administrators, lawyers, institutional review boards, and other interested parties can evaluate the legal reasoning and interpretation embodied in the formalization, and the specific rationale for a decision to accept or release a particular dataset.
Federal Register :: Request for Public Comment on Draft Desirable Characteristics of Repositories for Managing and Sharing Data Resulting From Federally Funded Research
“The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is seeking public comments on a draft set of desirable characteristics of data repositories used to locate, manage, share, and use data resulting from Federally funded research. The purpose of this effort is to identify and help Federal agencies provide more consistent information on desirable characteristics of data repositories for data subject to agency Public Access Plans and data management and sharing policies, whether those repositories are operated by government or non-governmental entities. Optimization and improved consistency in agency-provided information for data repositories is expected to reduce the burden for researchers. Feedback obtained through this Request for Comments (RFC) will help to inform coordinated agency action.”
ARL Comments on Draft NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing – Association of Research Libraries
“On November 6, 2019, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) published a request for public comments on a DRAFT NIH Policy for Data Management and Sharing and supplemental DRAFT guidance. NIH has a long history of promoting public access to the research it funds, including policies for sharing scientific data generated from large awards, genomic data, and data from clinical trials.
The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) welcomes the opportunity to comment on these new draft policies, expanding the guidance on data sharing to all extramural awards, contracts, intramural research projects, and other funding agreements. ARL offers these comments in consultation with member representatives, experts in the data librarian community, and through consultation with a wider group of institutional stakeholders who recently met to draft implementation guidelines for effective data practices recommended by the US National Science Foundation….”
FAIRsharing
FAIRsharing
Data Repository Selection: Criteria That Matter – Request For Comments – F1000 Blogs
“Publishers and journals are developing data policies to ensure that datasets, as well as other digital products associated with articles, are deposited and made accessible via appropriate repositories, also in line with the FAIR Principles. With thousands of options available, however, the lists of deposition repositories recommended by publishers are often different and consequently the guidance provided to authors may vary from journal to journal. This is due to a lack of common criteria used to select the data repositories, but also to the fact that there is still no consensus of what constitutes a good data repository.
To tackle this, FAIRsharing and DataCite have joined forces with a group of publisher representatives (authors of this work) who are actively implementing data policies and recommending data repositories to researchers. The result of our work is a set of proposed criteria that journals and publishers believe are important for the identification and selection of data repositories, which can be recommended to researchers when they are preparing to publish the data underlying their findings. …”
Data Repository Selection: Criteria That Matter – Request For Comments – F1000 Blogs
“Publishers and journals are developing data policies to ensure that datasets, as well as other digital products associated with articles, are deposited and made accessible via appropriate repositories, also in line with the FAIR Principles. With thousands of options available, however, the lists of deposition repositories recommended by publishers are often different and consequently the guidance provided to authors may vary from journal to journal. This is due to a lack of common criteria used to select the data repositories, but also to the fact that there is still no consensus of what constitutes a good data repository.
To tackle this, FAIRsharing and DataCite have joined forces with a group of publisher representatives (authors of this work) who are actively implementing data policies and recommending data repositories to researchers. The result of our work is a set of proposed criteria that journals and publishers believe are important for the identification and selection of data repositories, which can be recommended to researchers when they are preparing to publish the data underlying their findings. …”
Public Access to NIST Research | NIST
“NIST is committed to the idea that results of federally funded research are a valuable national resource and a strategic asset. To the extent feasible and consistent with law, agency mission, resource constraints, and U.S. national, homeland, and economic security, NIST will promote the deposit of scientific data arising from unclassified research and programs, funded wholly or in part by NIST, except for Standard Reference Data, free of charge in publicly accessible databases. Subject to the same conditions and constraints listed above, NIST also intends to make freely available to the public, in publicly accessible repositories, all peer-reviewed scholarly publications arising from unclassified research and programs funded wholly or in part by NIST.
NIST publications can be located through the NIST website. Peer-reviewed papers are deposited in PMC. NIST Technical Series and publications that are not peer reviewed are available through govinfo. Papers can also be located through science.gov along with other government papers. NIST data can be located through the Science Data Portal on the NIST website and through data.gov, along with other government data. Links to repositories containing NIST code, data, and publications are provided to the right.
NIST has established an embargo period of no more than 12 months post-publication for making peer-reviewed publications freely available through NIST’s repository on PMC. Stakeholders may petition NIST’s Open Access Officer to change the embargo period in the following year for publications in a specified scientific field. A petition must demonstrate that the existing embargo period for certain fields of scientific research does not provide a public benefit and is inconsistent with the objectives articulated in the OSTP Memo. When considering changes to the embargo period, NIST will consult with other agencies that fund related areas of scientific research.”
Open Book: Kick-starting open data support | Research Information
“There has been rapid growth in interest in the potential of open data in recent years, and at City, University of London, we quickly recognised that if the university was to become more research intensive, we had to provide a more proactive research data service to our researchers.
One of the steps that we took to encourage data sharing was to create an institutional data repository for non-traditional publications, using Figshare for Institutions (https://city.figshare.com). Like many other research institutions, City doesn’t have a long history of providing data support and for political and historical reasons City’s data repository sits outside the library in the research & enterprise office. I’m very much an ‘accidental data manager’, rather than a data specialist. I knew nothing about research data management two years ago, and it is only one of many responsibilities I have at the university.
Unfortunately uptake of the institutional repository was lower than anticipated. We found that researchers often have little experience of sharing data, and unlike traditional forms of publication (such as research articles and book chapters) data is not typically a priority for researchers, as it doesn’t count in the UK’s Research Excellence Framework (REF)….
By the end of the support process it had been transformed with metadata, keywords, categories, and even the title of the final record, all being added by the research data team. The hope is that easing the submission of data will encourage researchers to use the repository in the near future, while improving the quality of the metadata will encourage use in the longer term, as the improved impact of the data begins to be seen.”