data2health / architecting_attribution Goto Github PK

https://dictionary.casrai.org/Category:Objects

we can use this for a base and map other stuff here (other research object type concepts from other vocabs like publications from MeSH)

Develop wizard to generate enhanced attribution content. Input could be a persistent identifier (or set of PIDs), output is properly formatted citation with enhanced content or block of text.

• narrative for contributions to science sections of the biosketch
• annotations for individual citations (e.g., critical references form or a CV)

To determine: deliverables, staffing, schedule, stakeholders, CTSA context, communication plan

As a user I would like this CRO to be available in Bioportal and Ontobee

Draft annotation file structure is here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sqDi2RtErDUqP1ovyV45Cz07vYvxnpyOjwBVJt2k3a8/edit#gid=0

We need to illustrate: contributions to different types of research products, and their representation in the file. The use cases could also include what viewing that information might look like (for example, in a software repo there could be a file analogous to the license.md file).

See file here

• Write blog post

• Create pointers to where CRO can be found (and in which formats)

• more info at https://www.niso.org/publications/rp-25-2016-altmetrics (section 2, download report here)
• NISO Scholarly Outputs table details below...

from the report:

The NISO Scholarly Outputs table (see Google document at https://sites.google.com/a/niso.org/scholarlyoutputs/) is a first attempt at a comprehensive list of research outputs, including the traditional academic publication and extending to more alternative outputs. These outputs may fall within the scope of assessment when developing metrics to evaluate the impact of scholarly activity, with the acknowledgement that meaningful impact can go far beyond conventional publishing workflows and often involves the rich array of scholarly products that are created during the research process. These output types are grouped by class and alphabetized with a brief description and documentation of known current efforts (and by whom they are being undertaken). Relevant links are listed where available, and most entries have been assigned a focus area to group them by similar contextual uses. The focus areas are: Basic Sciences; Capacity; Code and Software; Communications; Data; Education and Training Materials; Events; Grey Literature; Images, Diagrams, and Video; Industry; Instruments, Devices, and Inventions; Methodologies, Publications; Regulatory, Compliance, and Legislation; Standards; and Other.

This work is not complete, as the very nature of scholarly activity continually evolves. However, the rich array of outputs represented in this table help to better establish the breadth and depth of scholarly work that may be produced by an investigator or by a research team. Through this effort, the working group hopes to generate discussion about how we may begin to leverage integrated data, persistent identifiers, and automated workflows to better capture and track the full complement of research activity, as is possible for publication data.

import the whole CREDIT ontology as an owl:imports (on the ontology metadata page in Protege)

and add some citations to relevant papers and posters

As a user I would like the CRO to be available in OWL and OBO formats.

@marijane, if it is not easy to do this automatically, I can do it manually.

rename ROO to research artefact ontology (RAO)

Send draft to Chunlei, Dave, Melissa

Write a quick sentence explaining what we'd like to do w/WD and COAR and why it's good.

KH to send to Chunlei for his okay before sending

Create a shared doc

We should take a hint from ORD camp and make some cool badges :)

this spreadsheet contains all of the terms that were brainstormed at the Force2015 workshop:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BudaIWSIgo7RVmzIpWO_hkE5mlgeii16xBTY37d0Zek/edit#gid=0

At the F2F, we decided that we didn't want to add all of these terms to the CRO at this time. I think a lot of terms are overlapping though, is it worth comparing this file to to the terms that are currently in the CRO, to see if there are some new terms we may want to potentially add?

It needs to end in .owl. Prerequisite for #9.

Lisa to source, provide options to KH for selection.

Some of the suggestions include MeSH publication types, wikidata, etc.
MJ looking for what's available in RDF. :-)

Overall Qs to resolve:

• is it our goal to use linked data?
• what are our requirements?
• What makes it useful?

Definition: A role related to creations of the mind, such as inventions; literary and artistic works; designs; and symbols, names and images used in commerce.
From https://www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/

Overlaps with educational instruction role.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QqKUtSQ701gq1bwEY2EF-8FrYnZUlCRvW3V0PY02euM/edit#gid=0

https://help.github.com/en/articles/adding-a-code-of-conduct-to-your-project

Related to issue #38
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Mw8gK2NUGM8po7GGRtJTShRM2QNFoR19VJrjQuVCDW8/edit#gid=323661248)

Nicole needs this in order to move on.

If anyone in the community would like to comment on these, please do!

specifically resource types, in the context of artifacts.
https://www.coar-repositories.org/activities/repository-interoperability/coar-vocabularies/

Is OpenRIF a related repo? https://github.com/openrif

See https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Publication_types

part of #34

This is from the Phase 2 doc. Not entirely sure what the action item is here

Use COAR NGR as a guide to construct the following support materials:

• Vision & Objectives
• Principles
• Design Assumptions
• Behaviours
• Technologies

A few comments to potentially make this project repo description more useful to naive readers and to NCATS:

Under the deliverables, I made some suggested descriptors for some, but others i didn't really know what they meant:

• Better understanding of how to address research output types and versioning of objects in the context of unique identifiers
  => is this the data model and use of Wikidata and other sources as types? perhaps this can be better described if so?
• A large knowledge base of contribution / attribution data available for use by CTSA hubs
  => where will this come from? is it feasible in the 6 month timeframe? where will it live?

Minor- I find the long list of potentially relevant repositories distracting from the actual project. One way to address this would be to create requirements/documentation in the Github Wiki and organize the information there. Similarly, it would be good to start developing some of the implementation requirements and best practices there.

We list a lot of repos under the Repositories header in the ReadMe file.

It would be nice to include the description alongside the name.

I can work on this, or if anyone would like to help/do it, please assign yourself. :)

Use research objects from Wikidata for the annotation files

• Review research objects/artefacts in the COAR Controlled Vocabularies (specifically the Resource Type Vocabulary) The COAR Controlled Vocabularies are described in SKOS. #38
• Map these terms to Wikidata terms. (we will first review the process for contributing to Wikidata) #39
• Consider further annotation with schema described here (objects and activities, to be addressed later) or this list of items of translational significance described here and shown here, as well as this and others (TBD, create new issue)
• Draft annotation file open for comment, leave comments at #14.

Some of the imported terms are missing definitions, so we need to decide if we want to write definitions in the ROO file, or submit tickets to the source ontologies, or both?

(I am leaning towards both)

Extend CRO using existing community contributions we’ve gathered in workshops on the types of activities for which people wish to receive credit

From the Phase 2 doc

see data2health/research-outputs-ontology#7

work on a plan of sorts for the RAO. Enumerate use cases, carefully document all the sources for terms we’ve considered, and evaluate ontologies for reuse. We'll break this out into user stories then.

What else can we be doing with this project? Where would you like to see us focus? What do you want to help create? Please share here!

I believe Dave is working on an app?

goal is to have modules for different domains

to do: @marijane to ping Chris M about creating a modular ontology with the ODK