April 22, 2016, 1 PM EST

Attendees

Steering Group Members

 Paul Albert (star),  Eric Meeks,  Melissa Haendel, Dean B. Krafft, Kristi Holmes, Bart Ragon, Julia Trimmer, Andi Ogier, Robert H. McDonald, Alex Viggio,

(star)= note taker

Ex officio

Graham Triggs, Mike Conlon, Jonathan Markow, debra hanken kurtz

Regrets

 

Location

Webex Meeting Link

Agenda

 
Item
Time
Facilitator
Notes
1Updates5 minAllSee below
2Review Agenda2 minAllRevise, reorder as needed
3Updates5 minJulia, Dean, Mike, AllConference, Leadership Group Meeting, User Group Meeting
3Force11 follow-up20 minMelissa, Kristi, MikeHighlights, action items.
6OpenVIVO

20 min

Graham, Mike, all

What happens next?

7Upcoming Meetings5 minAll

April 29 – Mike out
May 6 – User Group Meeting, no SG
May 13 

8Future topics3 minAllLeadership Group meeting, Webinars, VIVO Days, training, open repositories, a day before the conference, Steering Group elections

Notes

  1. Updates
    1. Mike' travel:
      1. April 22-25 Gainesville
      2. April 26-May 1 Mumbai – Clinical Pharmacology meeting
      3. May 2-3 Gainesville
      4. May 4-6 Chicago – VIVO User Group Meeting
      5. May 7-8 Gainesville
      6. May 9-12 White Plains, GA – Duraspace retreat
      7. May 13 Gainesville
  2. Conference update
    1. Deadline for reviewers will be moved to Monday.
    2. Have deadlines for the program coming up in May.
    3. Also looking at a new online program app GoVote.at - real-time results from voting. We don't need clickers because there's an app you can use.
  3. User group
    1. We have 16 registrants. Looking forward to a good meeting.
  4. Mike was a speaker at Allen Press on the future of scholarly publication. 
    1. Spoke with a number of representatives from scholarly journals.
    2. Showed publishers an example of a case where a journal article does not have a DOI. They started discussing how articles get DOIs as well as how to get DOIs for articles retrospectively. Also discussed ORCID.
  5. Force11
    1. Attendees had a sense that there is an ecosystem.
    2. I liked the style of the meeting, the quality of the meeting. A lot of VIVO speakers were there. Melissa did a fabulous job as conference chair.
    3. For institutions that don't necessarily have a VIVO, having something like OpenVIVO addresses this need nicely.  EarthCollab could be hooked to OpenVIVO.
    4. OpenVIVO is a nice demo platform so we can learn about managing a VIVO. Self-edit was mostly turned off.
    5. One complaint we got on Twitter is that a publication in the ORCID profile was wrong, they edited it, but OpenVIVO didn't bring in the correction. OpenVIVO compares DOI on login.  If the DOI is found in OpenVIVO, it does not update OpenVIVO – metadata is added only once.  Changing this to examine metadata and update based on changes would be difficult.
    6. There are two popular places where people are putting their researcher metadata. One is ResearchGate. It's much bigger than everything else. A survey of world scientists found that 65% had profiles. ResearchGate has no public or private API. The other is Google Scholar. Many people rely on GS, because Google is collecting it for them, and maybe all they do is reject suggested publications. I just found a piece of open source software which can scrape GS effectively. But are there license issues regarding the data?
    7. But - researchers have very limited interaction with GS. 
    8. Yes, and similarly, among all the ORCID profiles that have at least one work, a substantial portion are private or only contain a tiny bit of data about people. 
    9. Mike met someone from India who is collecting data on a national level. His system contains 22k researchers, 2K institutes, and 200k publications. This was a good connection to make.
  6. SimpleVIVO or the vision for a more straightforward VIVO
    1. Profiles has three spreadsheets. You can be up and running in no time. If you look at their spreadsheets: organizations, people, and connections between people. I think VIVO should do something very similar. There should be a way to get large amounts of tabular data into VIVO.
    2. One of the problems is the ontology is more complicated.
    3. There's a tension between rigor and pragmatism.
    4. Grid has alternate labels but VIVO has no notion of that. Sometimes, VIVO can be flexible to a fault.
    5. A problem is that, at the level of the triple store, you can still add additional triples. One possibility is to have an abstracted model which is translating between the triple store and the upstream systems of record.
    6. Validated middleware could ensure mistakes (e.g., multiple labels, multiple authorships for the same person) don't happen as much. It should know it's not possible for a a single person to have multiple authorships to the same work.
    7. We would need an intelligent interface such that when you delete an authorship, the right things happen.

 

Action Items

 

 

 

  • No labels

All content on the LYRASIS Wiki is licensed under the CC BY (Attribution) license, unless otherwise noted.