A Study on the Open Source Digital Library Software’s: Special Reference to DSpace, EPrints and Greenston

The richness in knowledge has changed access methods for all stake holders in retrieving key knowledge and relevant information.

This paper presents a study of three open source digital library management software used to assimilate and disseminate information to world audience.

The methodology followed involves online survey and study of related software documentation and associated technical manuals.

URL : http://arxiv.org/abs/1212.4935

Le libre accès en France en 2012: Entre immobilisme et innovation

“Pour faire l’état des lieux du libre accès (LA) en France en 2012, dix ans après la Budapest Open Access Initiative, nous avons examiné les deux voies : la voie verte (l’auto-archivage) et la voie dorée (publications dans les revues en LA). L’archive centrale multidisciplinaire HAL, créée en 2002 pour recevoir les publications scientifiques au niveau national, est reconnue pour sa qualité technique, mais elle ne propose que 10% à 15 % de la production scientifique annuelle française. Ce chiffre est à l’image de ce qu’offrent toutes les autres archives dans le monde où il n’y a pas d’obligation de déposer (pas de mandat). Les archives qui ont un mandat comme celle de l’université de Liège, ont atteint un taux de 80% en deux ans. Quelques archives institutionnelles se sont développées en France parallèlement à HAL, et deux d’entre elles (Archimer and OATAO) ont un bon taux de remplissage, grâce à l’implication d’un personnel dédié. Pour soutenir les offres éditoriales en libre accès le Centre pour l’Édition électronique Ouverte (CLEO) a récemment mis en place OpenEdition Freemium. Cette initiative pourrait favoriser le développement des revues en LA. Cependant, l’étude faite à partir des revues qualifiantes en Sciences Humaines et Sociales montre que les chercheurs sont peu encouragés à publier dans ces revues par les instances d’évaluation : peu de revues en libre accès françaises sont présentes dans les listes des revues qualifiantes de l’agence d’évaluation de la recherche et de l’enseignement supérieur (AERES). On note aussi une forte disparité entre les disciplines. Différents exemples de politique en faveur du libre accès sont donnés : un politique forte peut être menée par des universités, comme à l’université de Liège, ou par des bailleurs de fonds, comme le FRS-FNRS en Belgique ou par l’Europe. Elle peut être entreprise au niveau législatif comme aux USA, au Brésil ou en Argentine. En France les deux voies du libre accès sont tracées par des initiatives intéressantes. Le gouvernement français devrait accompagner ces initiatives et devrait s’investir dans une politique forte pour recevoir rapidement les bénéfices du libre accès.”

“Ten years after the Budapest Open Access Initiative, we have examined the current situation of Open Access in France via the two open access (OA) roads: the Green (self-archiving) and the Gold (OA publishing). HAL, a central multidisciplinary French archive launched in 2002, is recognized for its technical quality, but 10 years after its creation it only includes 10 to 15% of the annual French scientific output. This figure is similar to other repositories worldwide for which there is no mandatory policy (no mandate). On the other hand, archives such as that of Liège University which has a mandate, achieved an 80% deposit rate within two years. Other than HAL, a number of institutional archives are being developed in France, with Archimer and OATAO being two successful examples, thanks to dedicated library staff. In order to support the editorial offer in open access the Centre pour l’Édition électronique Ouverte (CLEO) recently launched the Open Edition Freemium. This initiative should favor the development of OA periodicals. However, the study based on the list of qualifying periodicals in Human and Social Sciences, shows that researchers are not encouraged to publish in these periodicals by national assessment bodies; very few French open access periodicals are on the different qualifying lists of the agence d’évaluation de la recherche et de l’enseignement supérieur (AERES – French research and higher education assessment agency). In addition, a wide disparity can be observed between disciplines. Different examples of strong policies in favor of OA are given: at the university level, as at Liège university, at the level of foundations, as at FRS-FNRS in Belgium, at the level of the Europe or at the legislative level, as attempted in the USA or Brazil or Argentina. In France the two roads are supported by interesting initiatives and these should be accompanied by strong French government policy to enable the benefits of open access to be rapidly reaped.”

URL : http://revista.ibict.br/liinc/index.php/liinc/article/view/502

Peer-Reviewed Open Research Data: Results of a Pilot

Peer review of publications is at the core of science and primarily seen as instrument for ensuring research quality. However, it is less common to independently value the quality of the underlying data as well.

In the light of the ‘data deluge’ it makes sense to extend peer review to the data itself and this way evaluate the degree to which the data are fit for re-use. This paper describes a pilot study at EASY – the electronic archive for (open) research data at our institution.

In EASY, researchers can archive their data and add metadata themselves. Devoted to open access and data sharing, at the archive we are interested in further enriching these metadata with peer reviews.

As a pilot, we established a workflow where researchers who have downloaded data sets from the archive were asked to review the downloaded data set. This paper describes the details of the pilot including the findings, both quantitative and qualitative.

Finally, we discuss issues that need to be solved when such a pilot is turned into a structural peer review functionality for the archiving system.

URL : http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/231

Research Blogging: Indexing and Registering the Change in Science 2.0

Increasing public interest in science information in a digital and 2.0 science era promotes a dramatically, rapid and deep change in science itself. The emergence and expansion of new technologies and internet-based tools is leading to new means to improve scientific methodology and communication, assessment, promotion and certification. It allows methods of acquisition, manipulation and storage, generating vast quantities of data that can further facilitate the research process.

It also improves access to scientific results through information sharing and discussion. Content previously restricted only to specialists is now available to a wider audience. This context requires new management systems to make scientific knowledge more accessible and useable, including new measures to evaluate the reach of scientific information. The new science and research quality measures are strongly related to the new online technologies and services based in social media. Tools such as blogs, social bookmarks and online reference managers, Twitter and others offer alternative, transparent and more comprehensive information about the active interest, usage and reach of scientific publications.

Another of these new filters is the Research Blogging platform, which was created in 2007 and now has over 1,230 active blogs, with over 26,960 entries posted about peer-reviewed research on subjects ranging from Anthropology to Zoology. This study takes a closer look at RB, in order to get insights into its contribution to the rapidly changing landscape of scientific communication.

URL : http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0050109

Building an Open Data Repository for a Specialized Research Community: Process, Challenges and Lessons

In 2009, the Institution for Social and Policy Studies (ISPS) at Yale University began building an open access digital collection of social science experimental data, metadata, and associated files produced by ISPS researchers.

The digital repository was created to support the replication of research findings and to enable further data analysis and instruction. Content is submitted to a rigorous process of quality assessment and normalization, including transformation of statistical code into R, an open source statistical software.

Other requirements included: (a) that the repository be integrated with the current database of publications and projects publicly available on the ISPS website; (b) that it offered open access to datasets, documentation, and statistical software program files; (c) that it utilized persistent linking services and redundant storage provided within the Yale Digital Commons infrastructure; and (d) that it operated in accordance with the prevailing standards of the digital preservation community.

In partnership with Yale’s Office of Digital Assets and Infrastructure (ODAI), the ISPS Data Archive was launched in the fall of 2010.

We describe the process of creating the repository, discuss prospects for similar projects in the future, and explain how this specialized repository fits into the larger digital landscape at Yale.

URL : http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/view/222

Beyond Citations: Scholars’ Visibility on the Social Web

Traditionally, scholarly impact and visibility have been measured by counting publications and citations in the scholarly literature. However, increasingly scholars are also visible on the Web, establishing presences in a growing variety of social ecosystems.

But how wide and established is this presence, and how do measures of social Web impact relate to their more traditional counterparts? To answer this, we sampled 57 presenters from the 2010 Leiden STI Conference, gathering publication and citations counts as well as data from the presenters’ Web “footprints.”

We found Web presence widespread and diverse: 84% of scholars had homepages, 70% were on LinkedIn, 23% had public Google Scholar profiles, and 16% were on Twitter. For sampled scholars’ publications, social reference manager bookmarks were compared to Scopus and Web of Science citations; we found that Mendeley covers more than 80% of sampled articles, and that Mendeley bookmarks are significantly correlated (r=.45) to Scopus citation counts.”

URL : http://2012.sticonference.org/Proceedings/vol1/Bar-Ilan_Beyond_98.pdf

F1000, Mendeley and Traditional Bibliometric Indicators

This article compares the Faculty of 1000 (F1000) quality filtering results and Mendeley usage data with traditional bibliometric indicators, using a sample of 1397 Genomics and Genetics articles published in 2008 selected by F1000 Faculty Members (FMs). Both Mendeley user counts and F1000 article factors (FFas) correlate significantly with citation counts and associated Journal Impact Factors. However, the correlations for Mendeley user counts are much larger than those for FFas.

It may be that F1000 is good at disclosing the merit of an article from an expert practitioner point of view while Mendeley user counts may be more closely related to traditional citation impact. Articles that attract exceptionally many citations are generally disorder or disease related, while those with extremely high social bookmark user counts are mainly historical or introductory.

URL : http://2012.sticonference.org/Proceedings/vol2/Li_F1000_541.pdf