1. Building Repositories of eprints in UK Research Universities Bill Hubbard SHERPA Project Manager University of Nottingham

2. repositories and e-prints... research material available on the web cross-searchable rapid dissemination institutionally based

3. e-prints e-prints are electronic versions of research papers and other similar output pre-prints (pre-referred papers) post-prints (post-refereed papers) other material –conference papers, book chapters, reports, etc. key is subjects quality control – particularly peer review

4. archives, repositories and OAJ archives repositories open access journals

5. why use OAI repositories dissemination of research impact of research access to research easy integration with current practice

6. publication & deposition

7. Author writes paper

8. publication & deposition Author writes paper Submits to journal

9. publication & deposition Author writes paper Submits to journal Deposits in e-print repository

10. publication & deposition Author writes paper Submits to journal Paper refereed Deposits in e-print repository

11. publication & deposition Author writes paper Submits to journal Paper refereed Revised by author Deposits in e-print repository

12. publication & deposition Author writes paper Submits to journal Paper refereed Revised by author Author submits final version Deposits in e-print repository

13. publication & deposition Author writes paper Submits to journal Paper refereed Revised by author Author submits final version Deposits in e-print repository

14. publication & deposition Author writes paper Submits to journal Paper refereed Revised by author Author submits final version Published in journal Deposits in e-print repository

15. benefits for the researcher wide dissemination –papers more visible –cited more rapid dissemination ease of access cross-searchable value added services –hit counts on papers –personalised publications lists –citation analyses

16. why institutional? institutions have centralised resources: –to subsidise repository start up –to support repositories with technical / organisational infrastructures –to deal effectively with preservation issues over the long term institutions get benefits: –raising profile and prestige of institution –managing institutional information assets –encourages an institutional identity in intellectual output

17. SHERPA - Securing a Hybrid Environment for Research Preservation and Access development partners –Nottingham (lead), Edinburgh, Glasgow, Oxford, Sheffield, Leeds, York, British Library and AHDS funding: JISC (FAIR programme) and CURL duration: 3 years, November 2002 – November 2005

18. Nottingham eprints

19. Nottingham eprints - search

20. Nottingham eprints - record

21. Arc

22. Oaister

23. Google search

24. Citebase

25. Citebase - citation analysis

26. repositories set up in each partner institution test papers being added negotiations with publishers discussions on preservation of eprints work on IPR and deposit licences advocacy campaigns starting sharing experiences and formulating strategies SHERPA - progress

27. Summary open access repositories are good for research institutional repositories offer one solution supplementary to current practice easy to adopt assistance is available

28. http://www.sherpa.ac.uk bill.hubbard@nottingham.ac.uk

29. issues collection policy preservation IPR cultural differences and changes

30. OAI, OAIS, BOAI OAI - Open Archives Initiative –Open - interoperable archives with an open architecture OAIS - Open Archival Information System reference model –Open - open for comments and contributions; the reference model for archives is developed in an open forum BOAI - Budapest Open Access Initiative –Open - freely accessible, open access

31. successful archives arXiv - http://www.arxiv.org/ –Set up 1991 at Los Alamos –Now based at: Cornell University –Covers: Physics, Mathematics, Computer Science –Contents: 250,000 papers (pre-prints and post-prints) other archives: –CogPrints - Cognitive Science –RePec - Economics working papers centralised subject-based archives

32. issues collection policy preservation IPR cultural differences and changes

33. collection policy document type –pre-prints v. post-prints; authors: staff, students, others? document format –HTML, PDF, Postscript, RTF, ASCII, etc. submission procedures –mediated / DIY; file formats metadata quality standards –self-created metadata

34. research preservation issues selection and retention criteria preservation metadata preferred formats life-cycle management cost models... one view is that it can all be set aside for now...

35. IPR author permission and licensing terms copyright and copying compliance with publisher copyright terms

36. cultural differences and changes different subject cultures –pre-print culture e.g. Physics –pre-print averse e.g. Medicine –Require: different policies or different archives? changing the status quo –advocacy and support

37. SHERPA - next stage work on IPR, Deposit licences, Metadata, Preservation increased advocacy within partner institutions support services: document conversion, archiving, IPR advice, and metadata creation adoption of Associate Partners

38. Citebase - references

39. Nottingham eprints - process

40. Nottingham eprints - about and menu

41. Citebase - abstract