Chuck Koscher Director of Technology CrossRef ICSTI General Assembly TACC Workshop Tokyo October 19, 2014 crossref: mainstay of the scholarly communication ecosystem

In the beginning = Reference linking (in journals)

# of metadata queries against crossref : # of retrievals of metadata from crossref : # of users clicking on a crossref DOI : 79,193,946 (August 2014) 418,245,644 (2013) 941,950,110 (2013)

First round expansion who cites my article 414,279,817 # of cited-by links in crossref: # of cited-by queries against crossref: 204,675,105 (YTD 2014) crossref search Full text search of article content across many publishers

Second round expansion Powered by iThenticate 2,071,471 Publication record: A uniform way to present important information about an article Manuscript originality check (# DOIs) 40 million + # of documents indexed 590 # of publishers participating 150,000 # of documents checked (monthly)

these innovations represent opportunistic growth good ideas lets give it a try

Third round expansion CrossRef Funding Data based on a core competency: centralized metadata collection and distribution define an emerging competency: uniform APIs enabling platform building

Funder Name Registry members authors Taxonomy of funder names Metadata identifies funding source Use pick-list to identify funders Query to identify funded articles (& data)

this is crossref data retrieved in real time from crossref

crossref funding data + crossref APIs + crossref metadata infrastructure a foundation for the Chorus platform = This capability is openly available to anyone.

crossref currently has 3 working groups focused on specific issues 1)publishers and funding agencies developing fundref 2)standards bodies redesigning metadata deposits and query services to better support Standards 3)book interest group driving change to deposit work flows to accommodate real world practices in book content hosting. working groups

Common characteristics for working groups typically lead by a crossref member (staff administrates) participants are members and non-members autonomous mostly goal oriented (exist until task accomplished) scope/mission may be broader than a crossref-specific issue working groups

research data 128 members have deposited 1064 database titles 798,925 database items Some ‘database’ deposits are actually reference works There are ‘legitimate’ databases

DOIs can be created for database content components (parts that make up an article) can be data items* publishers can cite database DOIs * in the article bibliography data DOI owners* can query crossref to see who cites their data Currently: publishers will be able create typed relationships between the article and the data* it makes use of (e.g. alternative to a formal citation) 1 st QTR 2015: research data * these can be crossref or DataCite DOIs

research data crossref is committed to DataCite interoperability engage our existing member constituency who are creating DOIs for data to identify and solve issues related to DOIs for data what else can we do (include participation by non-crossref members) create a new content type so that DOIs classified as ‘data’ can be correctly reclassified

research data proper recognition of research data faces the same seminal problem addressed by FundRef for funders: formalize the process of attribution DOIs provide part of the process a bigger part comes from community action

ecosystem*: community of living organisms in conjunction with the nonliving components of their environment * Wikipedia 9/24/14

thank you