- What is the title of this document?
"NSF Geo-Data Informatics: Exploring the Life Cycle, Citation and Integration of Geo-Data Workshop report 2011"
- Who produced it?
National Science Foundation
- What sort of document is this? (e.g. meeting notes, paper, publisher guidelines, workshop report, talk, other?)
Workshop report
- What subject domain is this document from?
Geosciences
- Does this document include explicit guidelines on metadata standards? If so, please include them here.
- Metadata needs emphasize discoverability by third parties.
- Metadata collection may need to be as automatic as possible, to accommodate large and unpredictable future metadata needs.
- Are there recommendations on best practices for software citation in this document? If so, what are they?
No.
- Please summarize this document, and explain how it is relevant to this working group in ~200 words.
This document summarizes the concerns and strategic plans raised in a meeting discussing the viability and way forward for data citations in geoscience; its main concerns include understanding how much metadata is needed at each stage of the data lifecycle, what tooling and infrastructure might be necessary to support this record, and sociological challenges around getting scientists to participate in broader metadata collection. It does not contain specific comments on software citation.
- What is the title of this document?
"Bridging Data National Science Lifecycles: Foundation Tracking Data Use via Data Citations Workshop Report"
- Who produced it?
Matthew S. Mayernik / National Center for Atmospheric Research
- What sort of document is this? (e.g. meeting notes, paper, publisher guidelines, workshop report, talk, other?)
Workshop report
- What subject domain is this document from?
Atmospheric Science
- Does this document include explicit guidelines on metadata standards? If so, please include them here.
Minimal metadata for a data citation includes:
- author
- title
- date of publication
- publisher
- a data set identifier and/or locator.
- Are there recommendations on best practices for software citation in this document? If so, what are they?
An example of data citation is provided, with an emphasis on resolving the state of the cited object which may change through time:
Doe, J. and R. Roe. 2001, updated daily. The FOO Time Series Data Set. Version 3.2. The FOO Data Center. http://dx.doi.org/10.xxxx/1234567. Accessed 1 May 2012.
- Please summarize this document, and explain how it is relevant to this working group in ~200 words.
This document examines the challenges inherent to building a framework and culture for data citation, by parsing the exact needs and motivations of its community in such an endeavor. It pays particular attention to defining what exactly is being cited, and how the non-static nature of data creates demands beyond those of traditional citation to capture not only the object, but the state of the object in question. Several recommendations are made at the institutional level for developing a data citation policy, which focus on simplicity and user specificity. This document does not contain specific comments on software citation.
- What is the title of this document?
"Transitive Credit as a Means to Address Social and Technological Concerns Stemming from Citation and Attribution of Digital Products"
- Who produced it?
Dan Katz
- What sort of document is this? (e.g. meeting notes, paper, publisher guidelines, workshop report, talk, other?)
Paper (Journal of Open Research Software)
- What subject domain is this document from?
Scientific software development / academic publishing
- Does this document include explicit guidelines on metadata standards? If so, please include them here.
No.
- Are there recommendations on best practices for software citation in this document? If so, what are they?
This paper recommends a system of transitive credit, apportioning credit for a paper by divvying it up among contributors, and assigning credit to the authors of dependencies proportionally.
- Please summarize this document, and explain how it is relevant to this working group in ~200 words.
This paper focuses on Katz's concept of transitive credit - a system for assigning credit to contributors to dependencies of a product, which is a central issue in software citation. This discussion is situated in context with the need for positive pressures for software citation, and the opportunities that a genealogy of objects creates in tracing the impact of things like bugs.
- What is the title of this document?
"Walk softly and carry a large carrot: how to give credit for academic work"
- Who produced it?
Sarah Callaghan, Todd Carpenter, and John Ernest Kratz for the Science and Technology Facilities Council
- What sort of document is this? (e.g. meeting notes, paper, publisher guidelines, workshop report, talk, other?)
Poster
- What subject domain is this document from?
Academic publishing
- Does this document include explicit guidelines on metadata standards? If so, please include them here.
No.
- Are there recommendations on best practices for software citation in this document? If so, what are they?
No.
- Please summarize this document, and explain how it is relevant to this working group in ~200 words.
This poster summarizes the results of a survey given to 115 people from a broad selection of sciences, which asked questions about which tools, what motivations and what practices respondents had for assessing the impact of data. Data citation and download counts were the most popular tools; interest in data reuse and interest in examining data quality were the most cited motivations; and 70% of respondents felt available tools were inadequate for their purposes. Some motivations for tool adoption can be inferred from this document.
- What is the title of this document?
"Useful Metrics"
- Who produced it?
- Karl Benedict - UNM libraries
- Ray Idaszak - RENCI
- Jennifer Lin - PLoS
- Fiona Murphy - Wiley
- Mark Parsons - Research Data Alliance
- Mark Taylor - Elsevier
- Curt Tilmes - NASA
- Kes Schroer - Dartmouth
- What sort of document is this? (e.g. meeting notes, paper, publisher guidelines, workshop report, talk, other?)
Slides describing a breakout session & its summary.
- What subject domain is this document from?
Unclear / nonspecific.
- Does this document include explicit guidelines on metadata standards? If so, please include them here.
No.
- Are there recommendations on best practices for software citation in this document? If so, what are they?
No.
- Please summarize this document, and explain how it is relevant to this working group in ~200 words.
This high level document describes a pathway for reframing challenges in more actionable language and notes some basic motivations for software citation regarding the need to create a credit market for software and data outputs. It's main value to the conversation for this working group is the question-framing it presents near the end, calling out a number of important questions to tackle in order for a sw citation infrastructure to succeed (see slides 7-10).
Phase 2/Bill Mills/swcitation.txt, bullet 1: http://f1000research.com/articles/3-139/v2
- What is the title of this document?
"Biological network analysis with CentiScaPe: centralities and experimental dataset integration"
- Who produced it?
- Giovanni Scardoni
- Gabriele Tosadori
- Mohammed Faizan
- Fausto Spoto
- Franco Fabbri
- Carlo Laudanna1
- What sort of document is this? (e.g. meeting notes, paper, publisher guidelines, workshop report, talk, other?)
Paper (published by F1000)
- What subject domain is this document from?
Life Sciences.
- Does this document include explicit guidelines on metadata standards? If so, please include them here.
No.
- Are there recommendations on best practices for software citation in this document? If so, what are they?
No.
- Please summarize this document, and explain how it is relevant to this working group in ~200 words.
This is an example of a published paper that does cite software 'out in the wild'; it does so in a specific 'Software Availability' subsection immediately following the Conclusion, and does so by listing a link to the current version of the code; the repo at the time the paper was published; and a DOI (from zenodo) pointing at an archived version of the code from the time of publication.
Phase 2/Bill Mills/swcitation.txt, bullet 2: http://www.plantmethods.com/content/10/1/23
- What is the title of this document?
"GrainScan: a low cost, fast method for grain size and colour measurements"
- Who produced it?
Alex P Whan, Alison B Smith, Colin R Cavanagh, Jean-Philippe F Ral, Lindsay M Shaw, Crispin A Howitt and Leanne Bischof.
- What sort of document is this? (e.g. meeting notes, paper, publisher guidelines, workshop report, talk, other?)
Paper (published in Plant Methods)
- What subject domain is this document from?
Plant biology.
- Does this document include explicit guidelines on metadata standards? If so, please include them here.
No.
- Are there recommendations on best practices for software citation in this document? If so, what are they?
No.
- Please summarize this document, and explain how it is relevant to this working group in ~200 words.
This is an example of a published paper that does cite software 'out in the wild'; it sites the software that is the central focus of the paper, developed by the same authors, and does so within the usual references section with the following syntax (by DOI):
Whan A, Bolger M, Bischof L: GrainScan - Software for analysis of grain images. 10.4225/08/536302C43FC28
Phase 2/Bill Mills/swcitation.txt, bullet 3: http://ascl.net/wordpress/?p=1137
- What is the title of this document?
"Astro software citation examples"
- Who produced it?
Alice Allen, for the Astrophysics Source Code Library
- What sort of document is this? (e.g. meeting notes, paper, publisher guidelines, workshop report, talk, other?)
Blog post describing a conversation at a .Astronomy conference and following informal assay of software citation practices in astronomy.
- What subject domain is this document from?
Astronomy.
- Does this document include explicit guidelines on metadata standards? If so, please include them here.
No.
- Are there recommendations on best practices for software citation in this document? If so, what are they?
No.
- Please summarize this document, and explain how it is relevant to this working group in ~200 words.
This document contains a survey, with explicit examples, of software citation practices and syntax as observed in an informal assay of publishing in astronomy. It was written in response to a conversation at a meeting on the same topic, and mentions another working group interested in exploring this topic.