Archive for the ‘euroCRIS’ Category

CERIF For Datasets – Paper

September 9, 2013 Leave a comment

I’m very pleased that Nikos Houssos will be presenting our Cerif For Datasets paper at the forthcoming conference:

We also included a link to the outputs of our recent workshops in the latest EuroCRIS newsletter on 2nd September.



Categories: C4D, CERIF, Dissemination, euroCRIS

Standard Metadata Requirements

May 20, 2013 Leave a comment

I’ve been speaking to colleagues at Essex and Southampton again comparing the metadata fields we have manifested in our initial ePrints data registries.  Lots of commonality – hurrah!    Some interesting differences.

We’ve got this item on the list for discussion at the forthcoming ePrints user group meeting on 14th June.

We have not currently included the geographic data fields in our registry for a couple of reasons:

  • Waiting for EuroCRIS to confirm initial CERIF version of metadata fields.  The C4D project submitted a specification as a suggestion and EuroCRIS are reviewing this along with other suggestions.  I think this should be ready soon.
  • We wanted to start with a generic registry rather than include lots of specialist fields.

I’m interested in finding out how other organisations are dealing with specialisms – incorporating a wide range of fields into their registry?   I’m hoping that many of the additional details will be held in subject and funder repositories which data creators store their data in and we can point to those and avoid repeating details.  However I guess there will be exceptions and we need to work out suitable approach.  People can always upload additional information in our text fields or as documents but that does bring other issues.



Categories: euroCRIS, Glasgow Tags:

Managing Research Data Programme Meeting 29th November

December 3, 2012 Leave a comment

Ryan and myself attended the JISC MRD programme meeting last week.

The meeting asked each project to suggest benefits from their projects.  Here is our slide:

benefits 291112

Over the next few weeks we will be clarifying deliverables for the project, and for the programme as a whole.

Apart from discussing common (and different) potential benefits from the projects there was useful discussion on many topics.

It was clear that many were still grappling with the issue of storage costs and how to support researchers in accessing and using storage.

The group were very interested in standard CERIF code for datasets and we should ensure that the programme mailing list is contacted once the code is finalised.





Categories: C4D, CERIF, Dissemination, euroCRIS

EuroCRIS 2012 conference

April 4, 2012 1 comment

As with the other two project Sunderland is involved in, C4D will be presented at EuroCRIS 2012 in Prague. C4D will be represented by both a paper and a poster.

The final draft of both the paper and the poster can be accessed below.

EuroCRIS2012 C4D Paper

EuroCRIS2012 C4D Poster

C4D CERIF technical meeting

December 5, 2011 Leave a comment

Just finished an extremely useful C4D technical meeting with Brigitte Joerg and Keith Jeffery from euroCRIS looking at how we can map MEDIN into CERIF. We have made a first pass at the work and will be producing a formal document soon for consultation with our users

Categories: C4D, CERIF, euroCRIS

Benefits and Metrics

December 2, 2011 2 comments

Using the benefits analysis toolkit from Charles Beagrie, we spent the morning session at Nottingham identifying key benefits and metrics for C4D.

We had to choose three key benefits (from quite a large list) for the research community which we agreed were as follows:-

  • Integrated thinking around research data management
  • Enhanced finding and organising of data
  • Greater consistency and standards between projects to enable data re-use

These benefits can be assessed using the following metrics:-

Enhanced finding and organising of data:-

  • number of research dataset publications generated
  • increased visibility of research through data citation
  • number of data deposits within repository
  • number of downloads of datasets from repository
  • number of citations to datasets in research articles

Integrated thinking around research data management:-

  • Average time saved in research data management and grant proposal activities
  • Results of user feedback forms

Greater consistency and standards between projects to enable data re-use

  • Number of datasets deposited with enhanced metadata

Some of the metrics are more difficult to measure than others, and that will be one of the challenges for C4D.