1 of 21

8th WG meeting: Post-plenary ‘Pause and reflect meeting’

Objectives:

  • The WG will reflect on the P21 session, progress achieved & feedback
  • Continue with landscape review of digital research tools (6 stages)

Thursday 9 November 2023

11:00 - 12:30 UTC

RDA-OfR Mapping the landscape of� digital research tools WG

2 of 21

A few logistics…

​

3 of 21

Today’s meeting agenda

Time (UTC)

Meeting agenda item

Lead

11:00 - 11:05

Welcome and housekeeping - 5 min

Connie

11:05 - 11:35

Reflect on P21 session using feedback from P21 session collaborative notes:

Collect - 5 min - Rich

Process - 5 min - Rory

Analyse - 5 min- Francis

Store - 5 min - Adam

Preserve - 5 min - Rory

​

Co-chairs

​

​

11:35 - 12:10

Breakout activity (35 min) �Completion of the Landscape Review of different types of research tools

All

12:10 - 12:25

Report back from each group (15 min)

All

12:25 - 12:30

Closing remarks and next steps

Connie

4 of 21

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XS0c4Bvd4kYTv1EzeIXA4br4Ry_omLIEzbEOYUTnSUM/edit#gid=0

  1. CONCEPTUALISE
  2. PLAN
  3. FUND

10. SHARE �11. ACCESS �12. TRANSFORM

​

5 of 21

REFLECTION ON P21 SESSION

RDA-OfR Mapping the landscape of� digital research tools WG

6 of 21

Deliverable 2: Categorisation Schema of Different Types of Research Tools

  • Mapping of different types of research tools to the harmonised research data lifecycle model (Deliverable 1)
  • Stages: COLLECT, PROCESS, ANALYSE, STORE & PRESERVE
  • Note: WG already mapped tools to PUBLISH in previous meeting.

​

7 of 21

Take home messages from the session

​

  • >130 tools identified & described for collect, process, analyse, store, and preserve stages of the research data lifecycle (input from SHAPE/HSS was lacking - particular call to RDA members to join this WG from those disciplines).
  • Each research data lifecycle stage comprises several different types of tool. Likewise, the same tool may be used for several different stages of the research data lifecycle. For example, some tools used for collecting data may also be used for the processing and analysis stages.
  • The WG should consider assessing the interoperability of different types of research tools. In particular, the group could investigate whether or not tools connect/interoperate with one another, how this is achieved (e.g., via APIs or metadata standards), and how this furthers the adoption of FAIR principles and practice.
  • See feedback and report out (P21 session collaborative notes)

​

8 of 21

COLLECT - RICH

9 of 21

COLLECT Stage - 2

10 of 21

COLLECT Summary of results

•47 entries in the spreadsheet

•Needs to be thoroughly vetted eg iNaturalist not maintained in expert view https://www.inaturalist.org/

​

Comments from the meeting

Collect - in-person group

•Lots of tools out there (dependent on discipline)

•Boundary of collect is unclear since many tools do more than collect

•Definition is useful, but limited

​

11 of 21

COLLECT Definition

revision

12 of 21

PROCESS - HEA LIM

  • High group enthusiasm & dynamic interaction
  • In-depth exploration of 'process' stage tools in the research data lifecycle
  • Different fields
  • discipline-specific tool lists
  • Data Management Plans
  • Compilation of tools and examination of their effective utilization

​

​

13 of 21

ANALSYE - FRANCIS

  • ​

​

14 of 21

PRESERVE - RORY

  • Preservation is more than storage
  • Remember that many many organisations are making bespoke tools…
  • Interoperability:
    • can any of these tools connect to each other?
    • Can they be strung together with tools from other lifecycle stages?
    • What sort of interoperability are we actually discussing? APIs? Metadata standards?
  • Possible new tool category for model: Interoperability Facilitation Tools;
    • metadata mapping tools,
    • data exchange and integration

​

15 of 21

STORE - ADAM

  • ​

​

16 of 21

Breakout activity: Landscape review of types of research tools

  • Each group is allocated a different stage of the research data lifecycle.

​

  • Identify different types of research tools mapped to stages of the research data lifecycle and start to describe them

​

  • Please find your tab and populate the Landscape review Google sheet - READ THE DEFINITIONS �
  • Divide members into groups - 35 MINS

1. Conceptualise

2. Plan

3. Fund

10. Share�11. Access�12. Transform

​

Nominate a rapporteur to report back your findings to the group in the collaborative notes:

    • What tools/types of tools have you identified?
    • What are their common characteristics, if any?
    • What information about the tools is useful to collect

17 of 21

Report back (5 min per group)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Oe0TzmG3qwBEIeszTx2Bd2Amfoa2ZVZjEeCbI36ylQs/edit#heading=h.1wf71fo7r8t8

18 of 21

Next steps - RICH

​

​

Connie - Questions to the group:

  • Should I send out Landscape review to all WG members for edits, feedback and comments before the next meeting?
  • Membership - level of commitment
  • Feedback form
  • Time - 11 UTC or 12 UTC?
  • Duration - 90 mins, ok?

​

19 of 21

Next steps

​

  • Thursday 7 December, 12:00 - 13:30 UTC
    • CJ Woodford, GORC International Model WG to present about the GORC deliverable
    • Important moment for this group to decide how to use the ’Services and Tools’ component
    • Agenda and collaborative notes to follow

​

  • Upcoming meetings, collaborative notes and presentation slides on WG webpage

​

20 of 21

Thank you! And, contact

Co-chairs:

�Facilitator:

  • Connie Clare, Community Development Manager, RDA, UK (connie.clare@rda-foundation.org)

21 of 21