COAR Forum on COVID-19 and Open Science – COAR

“The forum will showcase several collaborative initiatives from around the world aiming to improve the discovery of and access to COVID-19 research outputs. Participants will learn about the critical need for open science in the time of the pandemic, new workflows and practices that can be adopted in you own local context, and identify possible areas of international collaboration.

OpenVirus is a joint UK-India, open repository-based project to extract multidisciplinary semantic knowledge about viral epidemics (including COVID-19) through analysing tens of thousands or articles we can find clues to predict/prevent/mitigate viral epidemics.

OpenAIRE COVID-19 Gateway is a portal that provides access to publications, research data, projects and software that may be relevant to the Corona Virus Disease (COVID-19). The OpenAIRE COVID-19 Gateway aggregates COVID-19 related records, links them and provides a single access point for discovery and navigation.

Canadian COVID-19 Open Repository Initiative is a collaborative project led by the Canadian Association of Research Libraries to identify and make as many Canadian research outputs related to COVID-19 available through major discovery systems including the OpenAIRE COVID-10 Gateway….”

Overlay model for peer review on repositories – open for public comment – COAR

“The resource-oriented nature of the Web is well suited to an environment which places value in the fact that control of resources is distributed across a large number of repositories. In such an environment, it makes sense to take a pass-by-reference approach to interaction between different networked services, rather than relying on machine or human mediated processes to pass copies of resources around the network.

 

Resources in repositories have stable URIs that can be used for referencing. This means that a request for review can be sent as a standards-based notification that carries a resource’s stable URI to the inbox of a review service. This also means that the review service can obtain the resource that is to be reviewed by visiting that stable URI. From there, the actual resource can be retrieved by following some simple standards-based navigational conventions (e.g., retrieve the full text of a preprint, automatically, from having accessed a landing page describing it). Generally, this means that it becomes possible to invoke and use remote services on the network, by passing instructions to them together with, crucially, URIs identifying particular resources.

This document presents some simple models and vocabularies for using standard notification protocols to achieve common interactions between repositories and overlay peer review services, based on the use cases provided….”

Ars Inveniendi Analytica | Published by Ars Inveniendi Analytica

“we believe that the mathematical community could and should engage into the creation of a line of arXiv overlay journals, covering the various areas of Mathematics, and publishing papers of the highest quality. We are thus launching, with the support of a group of colleagues who have accepted our invitation to serve as editors, an arXiv overlay journal in Mathematical Analysis, called Ars Inveniendi Analytica. This journal will benefit from the financial support of the University of Texas Libraries, and has been assisted in these initial stages by the Harvard Library, a member of the Confederation of Open Access Repositories….”

Communiqué: Meeting participants agree to work together on a technical architecture for distributed peer review on repository resources – COAR

“On January 23-24, 2020, COAR (Confederation of Open Access Repositories) convened a meeting to investigate the potential for a common, distributed architecture that would connect peer review with resources in repositories. The aim of the meeting, hosted by Inria in Paris, France, was to share the current workflows of various projects and systems that are managing or developing overlay peer review on a variety of different repository types (institutional, preprint, data, etc.), and assess whether there is sufficient interest in defining a set of common protocols and vocabularies that would allow interoperability across different systems.

Meeting participants reviewed and discussed a number of different use cases. While each case has its own unique attributes, it was clear that there are significant similarities in terms of functionalities and objectives. A draft architecture for distributed peer review on repositories, applying existing web technologies and standards such as Linked Data Notifications and Activity Streams 2.0, was presented by Herbert Van de Sompel of DANS and prototyped by Martin Klein of Los Alamos National Laboratory. By the end of the meeting, there was a consensus by participants that it would be worthwhile to further specify the proposed architecture, through detailing the use cases, developing a common model, and further profiling the technologies. This work will be undertaken in the coming weeks and months.

The outcome of this work could be extremely powerful. It would allow us to move away from the current ‘system to system’ approach to a highly distributed, technically efficient overlay peer review architecture, which would enable any compatible repository and peer review service to participate in the network. This profiling builds on previous work of COAR such as Next Generation Repositories and Pubfair. COAR will provide regular updates about the progress of this work and all results will be widely shared once stable outcomes are available….”

Next Generation Repositories – COAR

“Next Generation Repositories (NGRs) is an ongoing initiative of COAR to identify common behaviours, protocols and technologies that will enable new and improved functionalities for repository systems.

The widespread deployment of repository systems in higher education and research institutions provides the foundation for a distributed, globally networked infrastructure for scholarly communication. However, in order to leverage the value of the repository network, we need to equip repositories with a wider array of roles and functionalities, which can be enabled through new levels of web-centric interoperability. In addition, to develop value added services on top of the distributed repository nework, the different repository platforms need to adopt a set of common technologies, protocols and behaviours.

In November 2017, COAR published the first Next Generation Repositories report which contains a list of 19 technologies and protocols for repository systems. The recommendations are based on a wide array of user stories and behaviours that were vetted and prioritized by the repository community.

Since then, COAR has been working with the community to have the recommendations adopted in the major open source platforms; to profile and pilot value added services; and continues to monitor new technologies on the horizon….”

COAR survey finds no large barriers for repository platforms in complying with Plan S – COAR

“In 2019, a group of funders known as cOAlition S adopted Plan S, a set of principles and requirements for full and immediate Open Access to peer-reviewed scholarly publications resulting from the research they fund, beginning in 2021. One of the routes for complying with Plan S is for authors to make the final published version (Version of Record, VoR) or the Author’s Accepted Manuscript (AAM) openly available with an open license in a Plan S compliant repository with immediate OA from the date of publication.

In order to support compliance with Plan S, repository software platforms, repository managers and researchers (who use the repositories) will need to be aware of the requirements and, in some cases, adopt new practices and functionalities. In April/May 2020 the COAR, in consultation with cOAlition S, conducted a survey of repository platforms in order to assess their current ability and intention to support Plan S requirements, and to identify any specific challenges related to their implementation.

The survey found that most repository platforms currently support compliance with Plan S mandatory criteria and, in the few cases where they do not, there are plans to adopt this functionality. In addition, many of the highly recommended criteria are also already supported by the platforms. As a next step, COAR and cOAlition S will continue to work together to ensure that repositories are well represented and to develop more detailed guidance that assist them in supporting the major functionalities envisioned in Plan S….”