Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1 A socio-technical infrastructure to support repositories Andrew Dorward EDINA UKCoRR Member’s Meeting, January 2012.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "1 A socio-technical infrastructure to support repositories Andrew Dorward EDINA UKCoRR Member’s Meeting, January 2012."— Presentation transcript:

1 1 A socio-technical infrastructure to support repositories Andrew Dorward EDINA UKCoRR Member’s Meeting, January 2012

2 2 Talk outline Background & rationale Who’s involved? The high-level plan –Stakeholder analysis –Wave One & Wave Two Out there – Open Access Publishing Summary

3 3 Background Original Repository Net Depot (continued as OpenDepot.org) IRS (continued as irs.mimas.ac.uk/) RSP (still going!) RRT (ouputs like SWORD still going)

4 4 Rationale UK RepositoryNet+: enable institutions to run their systems more efficiently by providing national shared services –consolidate existing ones –develop new services enable ease of use of shared services provided as part of the infrastructure scope new business models for sustainable services

5 5 Who’s involved? JISC and oversight group EDINA Services & Innovation Partnership Group –Mimas –Nottingham and Southampton –Other component owners Innovation Zone (UKOLN)

6 6 High-Level Plan Preparation: Stakeholder analysis Functional requirements Select components Jan OctMarAprJul 2013 Jan OctAug Implementation: Wave One Integrate components into a production environment Sustainability business models Other JISC Programmes (Open Access Implementation Group, Research Information Management, etc.) Implementation: WaveTwo Service enhancement Integrate new components JISC Service Portfolio Review

7 7 Stakeholder analysis Institutional view –Repository Managers via UKCoRR –Research administrators via ARMA –Researchers via IR managers Research funders –RCUK, Wellcome Trust Publishers –Green and Gold

8 8 Validated EDINA view of Repository Landscape –Proved initial theory correct –Assured us there were no gaps we had missed –BUT did not provide new feature sets to develop in functional areas How to take this forward? –Refocus for final report (March 2012) –Concentrate on use cases based on functional areas, eg publisher deposits, PI searches, IR Manager benchmarks, funder requires statistics Defining Wave 2 functionality –Define functionality for eg Curation micro-services in parallel –Feature set to be built out in integrated platform September 2012 – March 2013 Stakeholder Analysis: what we learned

9 9 The problem landscape….

10 10 Eval Academic reader researcher Research Outcomes UKPMC HEI Institution [OA mandate] Library CRIS Institutional Repository Publisher author(s) editor referee teacher student P.I. journal monograph Licensed/ tollgate access to Publisher’s Final Copy (PFC) Rich Picture: Actors, Agency & Relationships for Report, Deposit & Access ARMA Research Award reporting Deposit of metadata/text of Authors’ Final Copy (AFC) Digital Library curation micro - services Research Excellence Framework metrics Subject Repository stewardshipbudgets NORA UK Research Funder [OA mandate] HEFCE, SFC … EU RCUK Wellcome Trust SWORD CERIF UKCoRR EU

11 11 Supported Activites Publishers Academics Institutions Funders Reader Author P.I. Teacher Faculty Research Awards Institutional Repository Subject Repository Funders Repository Monograph JournalArticle CRIS Library Open Access Research Information Management Research Grant Office

12 12 Functional requirements Providing awareness of what is available Depositing content in an appropriate location Enhancing the quality of what is held Making use of what is held Analysing what is held and how it is used Protecting what is held over time Holding content

13 13 Components by SIPG and functional Category ROAR University of Southampton OAR-J Broker EDINA OPEN DOAR University of Nottingham RoMEO Juliet Open Depot ORI IRS MIMAS IRUS-UK NAMES2 REPUK Innovation UKOLN CORE Linked data/mobile Open University Search, Aggregation and Text Mining Statistics, Reporting and Benchmarking Relevant Registries Deposit Tools Metadata Quality, eg Naming Authority

14 14 Components Summary ROAR OAR-J OPEN DOAR RoMEO Juliet Open Depot ORI IRS IRUS-UK NAMES2 REPUK CORE Search, Aggregation and Text Mining Statistics, Reporting and Benchmarking Relevant Registries Deposit Tools Metadata Quality, eg Naming Authority Aggregated set of metadata for development Search, aggregation, full-text mining for OA repositories Search, aggregation, data-mining for all Institutional Repositories Database containing publisher policies on Open Access Database containing research funders’ policies on Open Access Virtual OA repository for researchers. Also redirects to relevant OA IR or SR using OAR-J Broker and ORI Identifies and directs researchers of multi-authored works to relevant OA repository(ies) Authoritative, manually curated registry of OA repositories, combined with harvested metadata Registry of OA repositories compiled by automatically harvesting metadata Organisation and Repository Identification – registry of all IRs Centralised service for collection of OA usage statistics Centralised Naming Authority for the UK assigning identifiers to organisations and individuals engaged in research

15 15 SIPG Components showing common/shared functionality ROAR University of Southampton OAR-J Broker EDINA OPEN DOAR University of Nottingham RoMEO Juliet Open Depot ORI IRS MIMAS IRUS-UK NAMES2 REPUK Innovation UKOLN CORE Linked data/mobile Open University Notes: Collision Zones’ in 2 areas: Search, Aggregation and Text Mining; Relevant Registries In Deposit Tools, Open Depot and the OAR-J Broker are developed in tandem, are mutually dependent and can be seen to have complementary functionality

16 16 Component selection Open, accountable, fair process Evidence gathering now JISC oversight group Selection to be made Feb 2012

17 17 O A Publishing – PLoS ONE Number of publications each quarter since 2006, when PLoS ONE launched. Capture article metrics: ■Article usage statistics - HTML pageviews, PDF downloads and XML downloads ■Citations from the scholarly literature – currently from Web of Science, PubMed Central, Scopus and CrossRef ■Comments – left by readers of each article ■Notes – left by readers of each article ■Blog posts – aggregated from Nature Blogs, Bloglines and ResearchBlogging. ■Ratings – left by readers of each article

18 18 PLoSOne: article usage metrics

19 19 OA going mainstream….

20 20 Summary UK Repository Net+ building sustainable shared services for you Scoping stage completed Services delivered March 2012 onwards Questions?


Download ppt "1 A socio-technical infrastructure to support repositories Andrew Dorward EDINA UKCoRR Member’s Meeting, January 2012."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google