CERIF for Datasets: Background and Key Findings

CERIF for Datasets:Background and Key Findings

Workshop, London26th July 2013

CERIF slides reproduced from presentations by euroCRIS members :Keith Jeffery, Brigitte Joerg, Anna Clements

C4D workshop, Glasgow & London. July 2013

JISC MRD Programme Consortium : Sunderland, Glasgow, St Andrews,

NERC, EPSRC, DCC and euroCRIS “CERIFication” of the metadata about research

datasets Focus on MEDIN* standard : NERC requirement

for http://www.bodc.ac.uk/

* http://www.oceannet.org/

C4D Summary

http://www.bodc.ac.uk/


Datasets & metadataDatasets have sparked interest in metadata standards that support their: Discoverability Description Usability Re-use


For example … CKAN : www.ckan.org

– Software platform; default schema is DC eGMSDescription

– UK e-Government metadata standard; based on DC– ‘flat’ model; single entity (a resource or dataset); keep

adding attributes DCAT

– RDF schema vocabulary for PSI (public sector info)– Some normalisation; can’t capture different

roles/semantics in relationships

http://www.ckan.org/


Houssos, N., Joerg, B., Matthews, B.. A multi-level metadata approach for a Public Sector Information data infrastructure. CRIS2012. Prague 06-09 June 2012http://www.engage-project.eu/engage/wp/

http://www.engage-project.eu/engage/wp/

http://www.engage-project.eu/engage/wp/


Common European Research Information Format A conceptual model for describing the complete

research domain A standard for the development, implementation

and interoperability of current research information systems (CRIS) and their various application

Est. 1991; maintained by www.euroCRIS.org

… so what about CERIF?

http://www.euroCRIS.org/


Not for profit organisation of experts– Research organisations; funders; publishers; systems

providers; standards organisations 109 institutional, 38 personal & 20 affiliate

members (euroCRIS annual report 2012)

41 countries; not just Europe Main activity is the development, maintenance

and of implementation CERIF

… and euroCRIS?


euroCRIS : Strategic Partners


In the UK : The CERIF landscape


1/3 of UK HEIs have a CERIF-compliant CRIS* Driven by desire to better support research

management at the institutional level … and streamline reporting to funders

UK CERIF adoptipn

• Source: UKOLN (R. Russell), Adoption of CERIF in Higher Education Institutions in the UK: A Landscape Study, March 2012

http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/isc/reports/cerif-landscape-study-2012/CERIF-UK-landscape-report-v1.1.pdf




1991

CERIF 91

PROJECT

2000

CLASSIFICATION

RESULTS EQUIPMENT

PROJECT

OrgUnit PERSON

EXPERTISERoles

CERIF 2000 Model

- Networking of DBs- Exchange of Records

- EC Recommendation to Member States

- Data Model - Multilinguality- Controlled Vocabulary- Roles / Types- User-driven

- EC Recommendation to Member States

ProjectProject OrganisationOrganisation

Service

Funding Programme

Patent

Skills

CV

Product

Event

PersonPerson

Classification(Semantics)

Classification(Semantics)

PublicationEquipment

2ndLevel Base

LanguageSemantics Link

CERIF 2006 / 2008 Model

- Data Model- Model Normalization - Robust/Consistent Structure - Extensible Structure - Semantic Layer - XML Exchange Specification

- Elaboration on Publication- CERIF Core Semantics (2008 1.2)

2006 2012

--Data Model- - Infrastructure

- Facility, Equipment, Service

- Measurement & Indicator - Entities and Link Tables- Geographic

Bounding Box- CERIF 1.3 Vocabulary

- UUIDs - Terms - Schemes- CERIF 1.4 new XML format- CERIF 1.5 Federated Identifiers

CERIF 1.5CERIF 1.4 (XML)

CERIF 1.3

+ Linked Data

Acronym : ERGOParticipants : Keith Jefffery, Anne Asserson, Rutherford Appleton Lab, Univ Bergen,, many more

2002 2013

CERIF 1.6

--Data Model- - C4D

datasets


CERIF Entity Types• Base Entities• Result Entities • Infrastructure Entities• 2nd Level Entities• Link Entities

CERIF Features• Multiple Language • Semantics• Measures & Indicators• Geographic Bounding Box



Person OrganisationUnit

Project

PersonPerson OrganisationUnitOrganisationUnit

ProjectProject


Project


ProjectProject



Project


ProjectProject

PersonIDURIGenderFirstNamesOtherNamesFamilyNamesNameVariantsResearchInterestKeywords

ProjectIDURIAcronymStartDateEndDateTitleAbstractKeywords

OrganisationUnitIDURIAcronymNameHeadCountCurrencyCodeTurnoverResearchActivityKeywords



Project


ProjectProject

cfOrganisationUnitcfIDcfURIcfAcronymcfHeadCountcfCurrencyCodecfTurnover

cfTitle

cfAbstract

cfKeywords

cfName

cfKeywo

rds

cfDescription

cfKeywords

cfFamil

yNames

cfFirst

Names

cfOther

Names

cfNameV

ariants

cfPersoncfIDcfURIcfGendercfBirthdate

cfProjectcfIDcfURIcfAcronymcfStartDatecfEndDate


ResultProduct

ResultPublication

ResultPatent ResultProduct

ResultPublicationResultPublication

ResultPatent

ResultProduct

ResultPublication



ResultPatent


ResultProduct

ResultPublication



ResultPatent

ResultProductIDURI

ResultPublicationIDURITitleSubtitleAbstractBibl. NotePublicationDateTotalPagesStartPageEndPageKeywords ResultPatent

IDURIPatentNumberTitleCountryCodeRegistrationDateApprovalDateDescriptionKeywords


ResultProduct

ResultPublication



ResultPatent cfResultPublicationcfIDcfURIcfNumberPublicationDatecfStartPagecfEndPagecfTotalPagescfEditioncfSeriescfIssuecfVolumecfISBNcfISSN

cfResultPatentcfIDcfURIcfPatentNumbercfCountryCodecfRegistrationDatecfApprovalDate

cfTitle

cfAbstract

cfKeywords

cfSubtitle

cfVersionInfo

cfVersionInfo

cfBibliographic Note

cfAbbreviation

cfDescription

cfKeywords

cfName

cfResultProductcfIDcfURI

cfVersionInfo

cfAbstract

cfKeywords

cfName


CERIF has many advantages as the canonical model (the research information entities, attributes, associations and semantics) for contextual metadata for datasets:– Covers all aspects of research information: researchers, projects, organisations,

funding, outputs, equipment, services, and so on;– An optimal (relational) architecture allowing the expression of any kind of relation

between entities/attributes with every relation “time-stamped” and semantically defined;

– Very fine-grained structure, allowing output of the metadata to virtually any format;– A separated “semantic layer” allowing the use of multiple (any) controlled

vocabularies (classifications, typologies) as well as their cross-linking and mapping;

– Ability to cope with multiple languages

Advantages of CERIF


Mapping to CERIF

24 of 30 MEDIN elements mapped to CERIF



DataCite version 3.0

Mandatory

• Identifier•Creator•Title•Publisher•Publication Year

Recommended

•Subject•Contributor•Dates relevant to work•Resource Type

Optional

•Scheme URI•Title Type•Subject Scheme

• Related Identifier• Relation Type• Description• GeoLocation

• Language of Resource• Alternate Identifier• Related Metadata• Size

• Data Format• Version• Rights• Geolocation Place

More work

required?


http://www.cerifsupport.org/2013/07/24/cerif-1-6-formal-models-released-for-testing/

CERIF 1.6 released for testing 25th July 2013




Mapping to other schemata

C4D vs RE3Data vs DCI vs DataCite


CERIF metadata model can be used to record rich metadata about datasets can related to other pieces of the research landscape can evolve / extend within formal euroCRIS governance structure

BUT … Needs testing in production environments Is cfResProd appropriate? Not just a research result? Ongoing need for agreed vocabularies

CASRAI RCUK harmonisation

Key Findings


Have used C4D as basis for checking whether DataFinder is rich and detailed enough

Once the C4D profile has been finalised, DaMaRo will embark on implementation of C4D-compliant outputs

Most fields map to C4D

Case Study: DaMaRo


Further consultation with euroCRIS/CERIF TG in terms of best approach

Aiming to achieve most comprehensive set of metadata (incorporating RE3Data, DataCite, etc.)

Move new Pure model to production (after REF) Exporting and importing CERIF-XML from

systems; exploring this with http://ckan.org Aggregation of data into national data

register model

Next Steps

[email protected]@st-andrews.ac.uk

Documents

CERIF for Datasets: Background and Key Findings