Fitness for use: Users of the U. S

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
OMV Ontology Metadata Vocabulary April 10, 2008 Peter Haase.
Advertisements

Alexandria Digital Library Project The ADEPT Bucket Framework.
17-Oct-02http://tmf.gg.uwyo.edu/ The Educational Object Economy: What is it? How do we make it a reality in the Earth sciences? James D. Myers Department.
A Semantic Workflow Mechanism to Realise Experimental Goals and Constraints Edoardo Pignotti, Peter Edwards, Alun Preece, Nick Gotts and Gary Polhill School.
TWC Knowledge Evolution in Distributed Geoscience Datasets and the Role of Semantic Technologies Xiaogang (Marshall) Ma Tetherless World Constellation.
Metadata Guides for Smarties Marine Metadata Initiative URL:
Distributed Access to Data Resources: Metadata Experiences from the NESSTAR Project Simon Musgrave Data Archive, University of Essex.
The Marine Metadata Interoperability Project A Model for Community Collaboration September 23, 2010 Nan Galbraith WHOI.
School of Computing FACULTY OF ENGINEERING Developing a methodology for building small scale domain ontologies: HISO case study Ilaria Corda PhD student.
Metadata and Geographical Information Systems Adrian Moss KINDS project, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK
Aligning library-domain metadata with the Europeana Data Model Sally CHAMBERS Valentine CHARLES ELAG 2011, Prague.
In Dublin’s fair city, where the metadata are so pretty… John Roberts Archives New Zealand.
USGS Metadata in the Broader Picture 1994 Executive Order – Metadata must be created for all Federally-funded research – Federal Geographic Data.
Problems/Disc. Adoption of standards Should there be standards? (not a big problem – responsibility lies with data centre – onus not on scientist) (peer.
Adoption of RDA-DFT Terminology and Data Model to the Description and Structuring of Atmospheric Data Aaron Addison, Rudolf Husar, Cynthia Hudson-Vitale.
Rupa Tiwari, CSci5980 Fall  Course Material Classification  GIS Encyclopedia Articles  Classification Diagram  Course – Encyclopedia Mapping.
Theme 2: Data & Models One of the central processes of science is the interplay between models and data Data informs model generation and selection Models.
Creating a Resume Career Education Harrison Center.
Barry Weiss 1/4/ Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology Quality Elements in ISO Metadata Design for Proposed SMAP Data.
Marine Metadata Interoperability Acknowledgements Ongoing funding for this project is provided by the National Science Foundation.
OOI Cyberinfrastructure and Semantics OOI CI Architecture & Design Team UCSD/Calit2 Ocean Observing Systems Semantic Interoperability Workshop, November.
The Semantic Web. What is the Semantic Web? The Semantic Web is an extension of the current Web in which information is given well-defined meaning, enabling.
Be.wi-ol.de User-friendly ontology design Nikolai Dahlem Universität Oldenburg.
QA4EO in 10 Minutes! A presentation to the 10 th GHRSST Science Team Meeting.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey WaterML Presentation to FGDC SWG Nate Booth January 30, 2013.
© 2013 by Nelson Education1 Job Analysis and Competency Models.
Principles of Architecture & Construction
Publishing DDI-Related Topics Advantages and Challenges of Creating Publications Joachim Wackerow EDDI16 - 8th Annual European DDI User Conference Cologne,
Digital Collection Development Policy
DSA and FAIR: a perfect couple
ELIXIR Core Data Resources and Deposition Databases
Libraries as Data-Centers for the Arts and Humanities
FAIR Sample and Data Access
Ways to upgrade the FAIRness of your data repository.
FAIR Metrics RDA 10 Luiz Bonino – - September 21, 2017.
Say, “S” (as) = semantics – and mean it
Lecture #11: Ontology Engineering Dr. Bhavani Thuraisingham
knowledge organization for a food secure world
Identifiers Answer Questions
DMP Reviewing Exercise
Data Management: Documentation & Metadata
The Re3gistry software and the INSPIRE Registry
OPEN DATA – F.A.I.R. PRINCIPLES
Gaps and priorities in sea basin observation and data
Metadata for research outputs management Part 2
Principles of Architecture and Construction
EUDAT B2FIND A Cross-Discipline Metadata Service and Discovery Portal
The JISC IE Metadata Schema Registry
An introduction to MEDIN Data Guidelines.
An ecosystem of contributions
From Observational Data to Information (OD2I IG )
CMSP / OCM Vocabulary Services rpi
Mission DataCite was founded in 2009 as an international organization which aims to: establish easier access to research data increase acceptance of research.
Session 2: Metadata and Catalogues
Open Science: the crucial importance of metadata
Dr Kristin Stock Allworlds Geothinking
Interoperability – GO FAIR - RDA
Evaluation of Data FAIR-ness from Prospective Data Users’ Perspectives
A Case Study for Synergistically Implementing the Management of Open Data Robert R. Downs NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications.
The WDS/RDA Assessment of Data Fitness for Use Working Group
Bird of Feather Session
Automatic evaluation of fairness
MSDI training courses feedback MSDIWG10 March 2019 Busan
eScience - FAIR Science
A Research Data Catalogue supporting Blue Growth: the BlueBRIDGE case
GEO Knowledge Hub: overview
Research data lifecycle²
Helena Cousijn, Claire Austin, Jonathan Petters & Michael Diepenbroek
Introduction to reference metadata and quality reporting
Cultivating Semantics for Data in Agriculture and Nutrition
Presentation transcript:

Fitness for use: Users of the U. S Fitness for use: Users of the U.S. Geological Survey Science Data Catalog Wade Bishop, Ph.D. School of Information Sciences University of Tennessee September 21, 2017 Research Data Alliance

Purpose The purpose of this study to determine how USGS re-users determine fitness for use of data.

Rationale To determine suitability for a particular application or purpose a user must know details about the data, including data quality, scale, interoperability, cost, metadata, syntactic and semantic heterogeneity, and others (Chrisman, 1984; Veregin, 1999). Although this seems reasonably easy to accomplish, communication paths (producer → user) are rarely direct, semantics vary, there are temporal lags between data creation and use, and the technical expertise of users varies significantly, potentially diminishing their abilities to make an informed evaluation (Bishop & Grubesic, 2016). Access and use issues multiply for aggregators of data (e.g., the USGS Science Data Catalog). A framework with the most vital facets of fitness for use would outline considerations for the functionality and design of data, metadata, and also the tools used to access both.

Study The study will employ interviews with 10-15 researchers using USGS data (i.e., Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center). These researchers are critical agents as secondary users of data (i.e., data collected by other researchers).

Planned Analyses The interviews will need transcription, coding, and analyses to produce a fitness for use framework for USGS data. The interviews will be coded using the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reuseable) data principles (https://www.force11.org/group/fairgroup/fairprinciples) as well as other data fitness for use factors.

Interview Questionnaire Job-related demographics What is your current job title? How many years in total have you been working in your current job? How many years in total have you been working with earth science data? Describe your work setting? Please indicate your credentials and degrees. Please provide any other educational or training you have received that is applicable to performing your job.

Interview Questionnaire (continued) Think of a recent search for data (or more). The following questions will determine how you discovered and evaluated that data for fitness for use. Findability How did you find the data? Did the data have a persistent identifier (i.e., a long-lasting unique reference to an objects location) (e.g., DOI; PURL)? Did the data have metadata? Did the metadata help you locate the data? Accessibility How did you access the data? Was the data in an open format (e.g., Public Domain, Attribution License, and so forth)? Was the data free? Did the data have use constraints (e.g., limitations of use)? Was the metadata accessible?

Interview Questionnaire (continued) Interoperability Was the data in a useable format? How was the data encoded and was it using encoding common to other data used in your research (i.e., same format))? Was the data using shared controlled vocabularies, data dictionaries, and/or other common ontologies? Was the data machine-actionable (e.g., to be processed without humans)?   Reusability Were there any issues with the data that impacted reuse of the data (e.g., resolution)? Did the data geographic scale used impact reuse of the data? Did the coordinate systems used impact reuse of the data? Did the metadata provide sufficient information for data reuse? Closing Please provide any other feedback about this project or data fitness for use:

This project’s potential implications Creating a user-centered methodology to build other frameworks; Contributing new knowledge of how scientists access and use science data; and Producing a framework that apprises how best to meet the USGS users’ needs for at least Wood’s Hole users.