You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.
Perspectives on the Implementation of FAIR Principles in Solid Earth Research Infrastructures
Copyright policy )Perspectives on the Implementation of FAIR Principles in Solid Earth Research Infrastructures
FAIR principles have become reference criteria for promoting and evaluating openness of scientific data and for improving datasets Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability. This also applies to Research Infrastructures (RIs) in the solid Earth domain committed to provide access to seismological data, ground deformations inferred from terrestrial, and satellite observations, geological maps, and laboratory experiments. Such RIs have been indeed committed for a long time, well before the appearance of FAIR principles, to engage scientific communities involved in data collection, standardization, and quality control as well as in implementing metadata and services for qualification, storage and accessibility. By addressing open science and managing scientific data, they are working to adopt FAIR principles, thus having the onerous task of turning these principles into practices. In this work we argue that although FAIR principles have the merit of creating a common background of knowledge to engage communities in providing data in a standard way thus easing interoperability and data sharing, in order to make the adoption of FAIR principles less onerous there is an urgent need of clear models, reference architectures and technical guidelines which can support RI implementers in the realization of FAIR data provision systems. We therefore discuss the state of the art of FAIR principles ecosystem and open new perspectives by discussing a four-stages roadmap that reorganizes FAIR principles in a way that better fits to the approach of RI implementers, and a FAIR adoption process that relates FAIR principles to technologies for their implementation.
Microsoft Academic Graph classification: Standardization Computer science Process (engineering) media_common.quotation_subject Interoperability Quality (business) media_common Data collection Findability Data sharing Metadata Engineering management
Library of Congress Subject Headings: lcsh:Science lcsh:Q
system interoperability, solid Earth science, research infrastructure, FAIR principles, multidisciplinary data, General Earth and Planetary Sciences
system interoperability, solid Earth science, research infrastructure, FAIR principles, multidisciplinary data, General Earth and Planetary Sciences
Microsoft Academic Graph classification: Standardization Computer science Process (engineering) media_common.quotation_subject Interoperability Quality (business) media_common Data collection Findability Data sharing Metadata Engineering management
Library of Congress Subject Headings: lcsh:Science lcsh:Q
3114
Bailo, D. (2019). Four-Stages FAIR Roadmap - FAIR “Pyramid,”. Zenodo. Available online at: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3299353 [OpenAIRE]
Bailo, D., and Jeffery, K. G. (2014). EPOS: a novel use of CERIF for data-intensive science. Proc. Comput. Sci. 33, 3-10. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2014.06.002 [OpenAIRE]
Bailo, D., Jeffery, K. G., Spinuso, A., and Fiameni, G. (2016). “Interoperability oriented architecture: the approach of EPOS for solid Earth e-infrastructures,” in Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 11th International Conference on e-Science, (Munich) 529-534. doi: 10.1109/eScience.2015.22
Ball, A. (2012). Review of Data Management Lifecycle Models, 14. Available online at: http://opus.bath.ac.uk/28587/1/redm1rep120110ab10.pdf. (accessed January 23, 2020).
Blanchard, B. S. (2004). Systems Engineering Management. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd,.
Boeckhout, M., Zielhuis, G. A., and Bredenoord, A. L. (2018). The FAIR guiding principles for data stewardship: fair enough? Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 26, 931-936. doi: 10.1038/s41431-018-0160-0 [OpenAIRE]
Buttigieg, P. L., Pafilis, E., Lewis, S. E., Schildhauer, M. P., Walls, R. L., and Mungall, C. J. (2016). The environment ontology in 2016: bridging domains with increased scope, semantic density, and interoperation. J. Biomed. Semant. 7, 1-12. doi: 10.1186/s13326-016-0097-6 [OpenAIRE]
Cocco, M., Bailo, D., Paciello, R., Freda, C., and Jeffery, K. (2019). The FAIRness horizon: from principles to practice, the EPOS experience in solid Earth science. Geophys. Res. Abstr. 21:13137. Available online at: https://ui.adsabs.harvard. edu/abs/2019EGUGA..2113137C. (accessed January 23, 2020).
Collins, S., Genova, F., Harrower, N., Hodson, S., Jones, S., Laaksonen, L., et al. (2018). Turning FAIR Data Into Reality: Interim Report From the European Commission Expert Group on FAIR Data. Interim Rep. from Eur. Comm. Expert Gr. FAIR Data.
Dillo, I., and de Leeuw, L. (2018). Coretrustseal. VOEB-Mitteilungen. 71, 162-170. doi: 10.31263/voebm.v71i1.1981
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).7 popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10% influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).Average impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10% citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).7 popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10% influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).Average impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.Top 10%
Citations provided by BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
- Florida Southern College United States
- National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology Italy
- University of Florida (South Africa)
- University of Florida Finland
- University of Florida
- University of Florida United States
- European Plate Observing System Italy
FAIR principles have become reference criteria for promoting and evaluating openness of scientific data and for improving datasets Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability. This also applies to Research Infrastructures (RIs) in the solid Earth domain committed to provide access to seismological data, ground deformations inferred from terrestrial, and satellite observations, geological maps, and laboratory experiments. Such RIs have been indeed committed for a long time, well before the appearance of FAIR principles, to engage scientific communities involved in data collection, standardization, and quality control as well as in implementing metadata and services for qualification, storage and accessibility. By addressing open science and managing scientific data, they are working to adopt FAIR principles, thus having the onerous task of turning these principles into practices. In this work we argue that although FAIR principles have the merit of creating a common background of knowledge to engage communities in providing data in a standard way thus easing interoperability and data sharing, in order to make the adoption of FAIR principles less onerous there is an urgent need of clear models, reference architectures and technical guidelines which can support RI implementers in the realization of FAIR data provision systems. We therefore discuss the state of the art of FAIR principles ecosystem and open new perspectives by discussing a four-stages roadmap that reorganizes FAIR principles in a way that better fits to the approach of RI implementers, and a FAIR adoption process that relates FAIR principles to technologies for their implementation.