1
|
Gomez-Diaz T, Recio T. Research Software vs. Research Data II: Protocols for Research Data dissemination and evaluation in the Open Science context. F1000Res 2022; 11:117. [PMID: 36483317 PMCID: PMC9706143 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.78459.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Open Science seeks to render research outputs visible, accessible and reusable. In this context, Research Data and Research Software sharing and dissemination issues provide real challenges to the scientific community, as consequence of recent progress in political, legal and funding requirements. Methods: We take advantage from the approach we have developed in a precedent publication, in which we have highlighted the similarities between the Research Data and Research Software definitions. Results: The similarities between Research Data and Research Software definitions can be extended to propose protocols for Research Data dissemination and evaluation derived from those already proposed for Research Software dissemination and evaluation. We also analyze FAIR principles for these outputs. Conclusions: Our proposals here provide concrete instructions for Research Data and Research Software producers to make them more findable and accessible, as well as arguments to choose suitable dissemination platforms to complete the FAIR framework. Future work could analyze the potential extension of this parallelism to other kinds of research outputs that are disseminated under similar conditions to those of Research Data and Research Software, that is, without widely accepted publication procedures involving editors or other external actors and where the dissemination is usually restricted through the hands of the production team.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Tomas Recio
- Universidad Antonio de Nebrija, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Gomez-Diaz T, Recio T. Research Software vs. Research Data II: Protocols for Research Data dissemination and evaluation in the Open Science context. F1000Res 2022; 11:117. [PMID: 36483317 PMCID: PMC9706143 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.78459.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/14/2021] [Indexed: 10/06/2024] Open
Abstract
Background: Open Science seeks to render research outputs visible, accessible and reusable. In this context, Research Data and Research Software sharing and dissemination issues provide real challenges to the scientific community, as consequence of recent progress in political, legal and funding requirements. Methods: We take advantage from the approach we have developed in a precedent publication, in which we have highlighted the similarities between the Research Data and Research Software definitions. Results: The similarities between Research Data and Research Software definitions can be extended to propose protocols for Research Data dissemination and evaluation derived from those already proposed for Research Software dissemination and evaluation. We also analyze FAIR principles for these outputs. Conclusions: Our proposals here provide concrete instructions for Research Data and Research Software producers to make them more findable and accessible, as well as arguments to choose suitable dissemination platforms to complete the FAIR framework. Future work could analyze the potential extension of this parallelism to other kinds of research outputs that are disseminated under similar conditions to those of Research Data and Research Software, that is, without widely accepted publication procedures involving editors or other external actors and where the dissemination is usually restricted through the hands of the production team.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Tomas Recio
- Universidad Antonio de Nebrija, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gomez-Diaz T, Recio T. Research Software vs. Research Data I: Towards a Research Data definition in the Open Science context. F1000Res 2022; 11:118. [PMID: 36415208 PMCID: PMC9650106 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.78195.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: Research Software is a concept that has been only recently clarified. In this paper we address the need for a similar enlightenment concerning the Research Data concept. Methods: Our contribution begins by reviewing the Research Software definition, which includes the analysis of software as a legal concept, followed by the study of its production in the research environment and within the Open Science framework. Then we explore the challenges of a data definition and some of the Research Data definitions proposed in the literature. Results: We propose a Research Data concept featuring three characteristics: the data should be produced (collected, processed, analyzed, shared & disseminated) to answer a scientific question, by a scientific team, and has yield a result published or disseminated in some article or scientific contribution of any kind. Conclusions: The analysis of this definition and the context in which it is proposed provides some answers to the Borgman's conundrum challenges, that is, which Research Data might be shared, by whom, with whom, under what conditions, why, and to what effects. They are completed with answers to the questions: how? and where?
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Tomas Recio
- Universidad Antonio de Nebrija, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Gomez-Diaz T, Recio T. Research Software vs. Research Data I: Towards a Research Data definition in the Open Science context. F1000Res 2022; 11:118. [PMID: 36415208 PMCID: PMC9650106 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.78195.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/14/2021] [Indexed: 09/08/2024] Open
Abstract
Background: Research Software is a concept that has been only recently clarified. In this paper we address the need for a similar enlightenment concerning the Research Data concept. Methods: Our contribution begins by reviewing the Research Software definition, which includes the analysis of software as a legal concept, followed by the study of its production in the research environment and within the Open Science framework. Then we explore the challenges of a data definition and some of the Research Data definitions proposed in the literature. Results: We propose a Research Data concept featuring three characteristics: the data should be produced (collected, processed, analyzed, shared & disseminated) to answer a scientific question, by a scientific team, and has yield a result published or disseminated in some article or scientific contribution of any kind. Conclusions: The analysis of this definition and the context in which it is proposed provides some answers to the Borgman's conundrum challenges, that is, which Research Data might be shared, by whom, with whom, under what conditions, why, and to what effects. They are completed with answers to the questions: how? and where?
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Tomas Recio
- Universidad Antonio de Nebrija, Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gomez-Diaz T, Recio T. Open comments on the Task Force SIRS report: Scholarly Infrastructures for Research Software (EOSC Executive Board, EOSCArchitecture). RESEARCH IDEAS AND OUTCOMES 2021. [DOI: 10.3897/rio.7.e63872] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
The goal of this document is to openly contribute with our comments to the EOSCArchitecture report: Scholarly Infrastructures for Research Software (SIRS), and thus, to participate in the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) architecture design.
Collapse
|
6
|
Anzt H, Bach F, Druskat S, Löffler F, Loewe A, Renard BY, Seemann G, Struck A, Achhammer E, Aggarwal P, Appel F, Bader M, Brusch L, Busse C, Chourdakis G, Dabrowski PW, Ebert P, Flemisch B, Friedl S, Fritzsch B, Funk MD, Gast V, Goth F, Grad JN, Hegewald J, Hermann S, Hohmann F, Janosch S, Kutra D, Linxweiler J, Muth T, Peters-Kottig W, Rack F, Raters FH, Rave S, Reina G, Reißig M, Ropinski T, Schaarschmidt J, Seibold H, Thiele JP, Uekermann B, Unger S, Weeber R. An environment for sustainable research software in Germany and beyond: current state, open challenges, and call for action. F1000Res 2020; 9:295. [PMID: 33552475 PMCID: PMC7845155 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.23224.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/09/2020] [Indexed: 08/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Research software has become a central asset in academic research. It optimizes existing and enables new research methods, implements and embeds research knowledge, and constitutes an essential research product in itself. Research software must be sustainable in order to understand, replicate, reproduce, and build upon existing research or conduct new research effectively. In other words, software must be available, discoverable, usable, and adaptable to new needs, both now and in the future. Research software therefore requires an environment that supports sustainability. Hence, a change is needed in the way research software development and maintenance are currently motivated, incentivized, funded, structurally and infrastructurally supported, and legally treated. Failing to do so will threaten the quality and validity of research. In this paper, we identify challenges for research software sustainability in Germany and beyond, in terms of motivation, selection, research software engineering personnel, funding, infrastructure, and legal aspects. Besides researchers, we specifically address political and academic decision-makers to increase awareness of the importance and needs of sustainable research software practices. In particular, we recommend strategies and measures to create an environment for sustainable research software, with the ultimate goal to ensure that software-driven research is valid, reproducible and sustainable, and that software is recognized as a first class citizen in research. This paper is the outcome of two workshops run in Germany in 2019, at deRSE19 - the first International Conference of Research Software Engineers in Germany - and a dedicated DFG-supported follow-up workshop in Berlin.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hartwig Anzt
- Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany
- University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA
| | - Felix Bach
- Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany
| | - Stephan Druskat
- Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany
- German Aerospace Center (DLR), Berlin, Germany
- Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Frank Löffler
- Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany
- Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
| | - Axel Loewe
- Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany
| | - Bernhard Y. Renard
- Hasso Plattner Institute, Digital Engineering Faculty, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
| | - Gunnar Seemann
- University Heart Centre Freiburg Bad Krozingen, Freiburg, Germany
| | | | | | | | - Franziska Appel
- Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), Halle (Saale), Germany
| | | | - Lutz Brusch
- Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | | | | | | | - Peter Ebert
- Saarland Informatics Campus, Saarbrücken, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | - Volker Gast
- Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Stephan Janosch
- Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics, Dresden, Germany
| | - Dominik Kutra
- European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jan Linxweiler
- Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Thilo Muth
- Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Fabian Rack
- FIZ Karlsruhe - Leibniz Institute for Information Infrastructure, Karlsruhe, Germany
| | | | | | | | - Malte Reißig
- Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies, Potsdam, Germany
| | - Timo Ropinski
- Ulm University, Ulm, Germany
- Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | | | - Heidi Seibold
- Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, München, Germany
| | | | | | - Stefan Unger
- Julius Kühn-Institut (JKI), Quedlinburg, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Anzt H, Bach F, Druskat S, Löffler F, Loewe A, Renard BY, Seemann G, Struck A, Achhammer E, Aggarwal P, Appel F, Bader M, Brusch L, Busse C, Chourdakis G, Dabrowski PW, Ebert P, Flemisch B, Friedl S, Fritzsch B, Funk MD, Gast V, Goth F, Grad JN, Hegewald J, Hermann S, Hohmann F, Janosch S, Kutra D, Linxweiler J, Muth T, Peters-Kottig W, Rack F, Raters FH, Rave S, Reina G, Reißig M, Ropinski T, Schaarschmidt J, Seibold H, Thiele JP, Uekermann B, Unger S, Weeber R. An environment for sustainable research software in Germany and beyond: current state, open challenges, and call for action. F1000Res 2020; 9:295. [PMID: 33552475 PMCID: PMC7845155 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.23224.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 01/11/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Research software has become a central asset in academic research. It optimizes existing and enables new research methods, implements and embeds research knowledge, and constitutes an essential research product in itself. Research software must be sustainable in order to understand, replicate, reproduce, and build upon existing research or conduct new research effectively. In other words, software must be available, discoverable, usable, and adaptable to new needs, both now and in the future. Research software therefore requires an environment that supports sustainability. Hence, a change is needed in the way research software development and maintenance are currently motivated, incentivized, funded, structurally and infrastructurally supported, and legally treated. Failing to do so will threaten the quality and validity of research. In this paper, we identify challenges for research software sustainability in Germany and beyond, in terms of motivation, selection, research software engineering personnel, funding, infrastructure, and legal aspects. Besides researchers, we specifically address political and academic decision-makers to increase awareness of the importance and needs of sustainable research software practices. In particular, we recommend strategies and measures to create an environment for sustainable research software, with the ultimate goal to ensure that software-driven research is valid, reproducible and sustainable, and that software is recognized as a first class citizen in research. This paper is the outcome of two workshops run in Germany in 2019, at deRSE19 - the first International Conference of Research Software Engineers in Germany - and a dedicated DFG-supported follow-up workshop in Berlin.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hartwig Anzt
- Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany
- University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA
| | - Felix Bach
- Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany
| | - Stephan Druskat
- Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany
- German Aerospace Center (DLR), Berlin, Germany
- Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Frank Löffler
- Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany
- Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
| | - Axel Loewe
- Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Karlsruhe, Germany
| | - Bernhard Y. Renard
- Hasso Plattner Institute, Digital Engineering Faculty, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
| | - Gunnar Seemann
- University Heart Centre Freiburg Bad Krozingen, Freiburg, Germany
| | | | | | | | - Franziska Appel
- Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), Halle (Saale), Germany
| | | | - Lutz Brusch
- Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | | | | | | | - Peter Ebert
- Saarland Informatics Campus, Saarbrücken, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | - Volker Gast
- Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Stephan Janosch
- Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics, Dresden, Germany
| | - Dominik Kutra
- European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jan Linxweiler
- Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
| | - Thilo Muth
- Federal Institute for Materials Research and Testing, Berlin, Germany
| | | | - Fabian Rack
- FIZ Karlsruhe - Leibniz Institute for Information Infrastructure, Karlsruhe, Germany
| | | | | | | | - Malte Reißig
- Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies, Potsdam, Germany
| | - Timo Ropinski
- Ulm University, Ulm, Germany
- Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
| | | | - Heidi Seibold
- Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, München, Germany
| | | | | | - Stefan Unger
- Julius Kühn-Institut (JKI), Quedlinburg, Germany
| | | |
Collapse
|