Repositories for research information management

1. Repositories for research information management Wolfram Horstmann • CERIF-CRIS andRepositories, Brussels, 12/13-oct-2011

2. The challenge • http://mhpbooks.com/mobylives/?p=33681 • Collaboration of researchers, administration & librarians!

3. Why CRIS & OA-Repositories? “Given their affinity, achieving interoperability between CRIS and OAR is desirable and will benefit all parties involved, including the researchers. A joint approach will avoid double input and management of redundant data as well as redundant services and processes and will both enhance the efficiency and quality (mutual enrichment) of the services offered by CRIS and OAR to their users.” January 2007: Knowledge Exchange DEFF, DFG, JISC, SURF Exchanging Research Information -- Razum, Simons & Horstmann [>> Text]

4. The Task • Thereis still an assumedcompetitionbetween CRIS and OARs andmanyotherinstitutionalsystems • CRIS and OARs shouldjoinforcestodeliverthebestpossibleservices • An accountof „Who doeswhatandhow?“ shouldbedeveloped

5. Delineation: Characteristics • Current Research Information Systems CRIS • administrative, sensitive, comprehensive, integrative, local, analytic | administrators • Open Access RepositoriesOAR • public, file-centric, rights, preservation, globallydistributedparadigm | librarians • Bibliography Management System BMS • CV oriented, complete, representative | researchers

6. Delineation: Commonalities • Bibliographic Information • Title, Source, Subject, Keywords, Rights, Authorship… • Affiliation • Author Identity, Institute, Organisational Unit, Research Group, Time Frame… • Project Information “short-termaffiliation“ • Time Frame, Funder, Participants, Budgets…

7. Delineation: Differences • CRIS morelocal, while OARs distributed • CRIS: Financial information • Budgets ofprojects, staff • CRIS: Staffinformation • Employmentdetails, costs • OAR: Full-Text Management • Access Rights, Identifiers, Preservation, Compound Objects / Research Data …

8. System Habitat • CRIS and OAR potentially • Financial System • Human Resource Management • Facility Management System • Campus Management System • BibliographicDatabases • WoS, Scopus, ArXiV, PMC, IRs/BASE • Authoritative Data Resources /Disambiguation • Vocabularies, Ontologies, ORCID/AuthorClaim • Massive commoninteroperabilityrequirements

9. ‚Species‘ • CRIS proper • CERIF-centric: selfor METIS, PURE, CONVERIS • Integratingwithinstitutional HRM, project & financialsystems • OAR proper • DCES , MODS etc | DSPACE, E-Prints, Fedora • BMS intermediates • Proprietary, MODS: DSPACE, E-Prints, Invenio, LUP, etc. • Aggregative Approaches • Sharing andre-usingresources

10. A CRIS AVEDAS AG, CONVERIS SYSTEM

11. An OAR ePrints Southhampton

12. Further Trends in OARs • Extension towards BMS / Reporting • Demand forauthoritativeresourcesincreases • Usageofvocabularies, ontologies, e.g. SPAR • Usageof web services, linkeddata • Personal displays, CV-Systems • Extension towards Research Data • Demand forcollaborationwithresearchersincresases • Repositoriesasembeddedsystems • localand global integration

13. Research Data & Enhanced Publications • http://www.ukpmc.co.uk

14. Semantic Web Approaches OpenAIREand KE CRIS-OAR Interoperability Project

15. Interim Conclusion • Neither CRIS nor OARs areautonomous • Rather open, interrelateddatamgmt. systems • Any individual solution will be different • Depending on thelocalsystemhabitat • Systems level not thecorrectapproach? • Ratherconsider human curationresponsibilities

16. Curationprocesses • Persons • e.g. Human resource office, IT department (IDM) • Finance • e.g. Finance office • Units • e.g. Facility/Campus Management • Projects • e.g. Research office, Researchers • Bibliographic Information • e.g. Library, Researchers

17. The curationview on CRIS & OARs • Treatment ofsystemsascurationtoolsmaintainedbyspecialists • Research projectmanager, financialofficer, staffmanager, bibliographyspecialist, datalibrarian, web contentmanager, identitymanager, analyst • Norequirementtobuildintegrated IT-‚columns‘ • Ratherdistributedsystemsview • Reporting asdistributedquerieswithdisplay • Data model maydiffer in systems, whileentities, propertiesandvocabulariesarealignedtointeroperate on theaggregation/reportinglevel

18. Conclusion • Convergencebetween CRIS and OAR • bothheadtowardsaggregativesystems • OARs become ‚sensitive‘ e.g. Bibliometrics, Research Data • CRIS becomepublice.g. CV displays, full-text • Differencestheretostay • Administrators as end-usersfor CRIS • Open Access ascommittmentfor OARs • Research Information Repository / ‚CRISpository‘ already a reality

19. Recommendations • Puttheresearcher in thecentre • CRIS & OARs havejointresponsibilitytoserveresearch • Even assessmentexercises will onlybeacceptediftheresearchersagree on theapproachtaken • Researchers are not interested in technicalities • Regard CRIS and OARs asassembliesofspecializeddatacurationactivities • Everybodyshouldkeep on doingwhat he/shecan do best • Systems andformatsareslavetocurationrequirements • Inter-departmentalcollaborationistheclue (andmainchallenge) • Codex: Nobody will takeawayresponsibilityoftheother

20. Andyes… …CERIF will bethecommondemoninator

21. Thanks!