Explore the historical Whois records related to free-access-database.com (Domain). Get insights into ownership history and changes over time.

AAD provides web access to accessioned electronic Records that are in database format.

The global market for academic research databases is experiencing robust growth, projected to reach $388.2 million in 2025. While the exact Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) is not provided, considering the ongoing digitalization of research and education, a conservative estimate would place the CAGR in the range of 7-9% for the forecast period (2025-2033). This growth is fueled by several key drivers. The increasing reliance on digital resources by students, teachers, and researchers across all academic disciplines is a significant factor. Furthermore, the expanding volume of scholarly publications and the need for efficient access and management of research data are propelling market expansion. The rising adoption of cloud-based solutions and the development of sophisticated search and analytical tools within these databases are also contributing to this growth trajectory. The market segmentation highlights the diverse user base, with students, teachers, and experts representing major segments, each with varying needs and subscription models (charge-based or free access). The competitive landscape is characterized by established players like Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed, alongside other significant contributors like ERIC, ProQuest, and IEEE Xplore, indicating a market with both established dominance and emerging players vying for market share. Geographic distribution shows a strong presence across North America and Europe, but with significant growth potential in Asia-Pacific regions. The market's future trajectory will likely be shaped by several trends. The increasing integration of artificial intelligence (AI) for enhanced search and data analysis capabilities will be a major factor. The ongoing development of open-access initiatives and the expansion of free databases will influence market dynamics, potentially impacting the revenue streams of subscription-based services. However, challenges such as data security concerns, the need for continuous content updates, and the varying levels of digital literacy across different user groups may act as restraints on market growth. Nevertheless, the overall outlook for the academic research database market remains positive, driven by the continued expansion of scholarly research and the growing demand for efficient and reliable access to research information globally.

Geochemical fingerprinting artefacts and sources has proven to be the most effective way to use material evidence in order to reconstruct raw material procurement practices, intra- and inter-community interactions, and mobility patterns among past societies. In order to facilitate access to this growing body of data and to promote comparability and reproducibility in provenance studies, we designed Pofatu, the first online and open-access database presenting geochemical compositions and contextual information for archaeological sources and artefacts.

The O*NET Database contains hundreds of standardized and occupation-specific descriptors on almost 1,000 occupations covering the entire U.S. economy. The database, which is available to the public at no cost, is continually updated by a multi-method data collection program. Sources of data include: job incumbents, occupational experts, occupational analysts, employer job postings, and customer/professional association input.

Data content areas include:

• Worker Characteristics (e.g., Abilities, Interests, Work Styles)
• Worker Requirements (e.g., Education, Knowledge, Skills)
• Experience Requirements (e.g., On-the-Job Training, Work Experience)
• Occupational Requirements (e.g., Detailed Work Activities, Work Context)
• Occupation-Specific Information (e.g., Job Titles, Tasks, Technology Skills)

In 2023, 0.27 percent of surveyed internet users in Luxembourg used the internet to access public databases and registers, up from 0.23 percent in 2022.

Dataset results of online questionnaire (n = 230)

Contains details of all Department for Transport central staff who have been issued with a laptop to enable them to use the ETHOS Remote Access Service. The database contains the following details: user's name; user-id; division; location; make, model; Tag number of laptop; primary/secondary machine; connection mode (wireless or 3G) and IT Focal Point.

Link Function: information

AAD provides web access to accessioned electronic Records that are in database format.

and “Handwritten” written by the natural human hand.

The Habitat Use Database (HUD) was specifically designed to address the need for habitat-use analyses in support of groundfish EFH, HAPCs, and fishing and nonfishing impacts components of the 2005 EFH EIS. HUD functionality and accessibility, and the ecological information upon which the HUD is based, will be improved in order for this database to fully support fisheries and ecosystem science and management. Upgrades to and applications of the HUD will be facilitated through a series of prioritized phases: • Fully integrate the data entry, quality control, and reporting capabilities from the original HUD Access database with a web-based and programmatic interface. Improve software for HUD to accommodate the most current habitat maps and habitat classification codes. This will be achieved by NMFS in consultation with HUD architects at Oregon State University. • Review and update the biological and ecological information in the HUD. • Develop and apply improved models that will be used to create updated habitat suitability maps for all west coast groundfish species using the updated HUD and Pacific coast seafloor habitat maps. • Integrate habitat suitability models with the online groundfish EFH data catalog (http://efh-catalog.coas.oregonstate.edu/overview/). 2005 habitat-use analysis supporting groundfish EFH.

AGRICOLA (AGRICultural OnLine Access) serves as the catalog and index to the collections of the National Agricultural Library, as well as a primary public source for world-wide access to agricultural information. The database covers materials in all formats and periods, including printed works from as far back as the 15th century.

Geochemical fingerprinting of artefacts and sources has proven to be the most effective way to use material evidence in order to reconstruct strategies of raw material procurement, exchange systems, and mobility patterns among past societies. In order to facilitate access to this growing body of data and to promote comparability and reproducibility in provenance studies, we designed Pofatu, the first online and open-access database presenting geochemical compositions and contextual information for archaeological sources and artefacts.

The data repository includes a compilation of geochemical data and supporting analytical metadata, as well as the archaeological provenance and context for each sample. All information on Samples related to sources and artefacts can be accessed on this platform or downloaded from Zenodo or GitHub.

While most prehistoric quarries and surface procurement sources used in the past have yet to be identified, provenance studies must also integrate wide and reliable geological data. For this reason, we advise Pofatu users to also consult other open-access repositories focusing specifically on geological samples, such as GeoRoc and EarthChem.

United States agricultural researchers have many options for making their data available online. This dataset aggregates the primary sources of ag-related data and determines where researchers are likely to deposit their agricultural data. These data serve as both a current landscape analysis and also as a baseline for future studies of ag research data. Purpose As sources of agricultural data become more numerous and disparate, and collaboration and open data become more expected if not required, this research provides a landscape inventory of online sources of open agricultural data. An inventory of current agricultural data sharing options will help assess how the Ag Data Commons, a platform for USDA-funded data cataloging and publication, can best support data-intensive and multi-disciplinary research. It will also help agricultural librarians assist their researchers in data management and publication. The goals of this study were to

establish where agricultural researchers in the United States-- land grant and USDA researchers, primarily ARS, NRCS, USFS and other agencies -- currently publish their data, including general research data repositories, domain-specific databases, and the top journals compare how much data is in institutional vs. domain-specific vs. federal platforms determine which repositories are recommended by top journals that require or recommend the publication of supporting data ascertain where researchers not affiliated with funding or initiatives possessing a designated open data repository can publish data

Approach The National Agricultural Library team focused on Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and United States Forest Service (USFS) style research data, rather than ag economics, statistics, and social sciences data. To find domain-specific, general, institutional, and federal agency repositories and databases that are open to US research submissions and have some amount of ag data, resources including re3data, libguides, and ARS lists were analysed. Primarily environmental or public health databases were not included, but places where ag grantees would publish data were considered.
Search methods We first compiled a list of known domain specific USDA / ARS datasets / databases that are represented in the Ag Data Commons, including ARS Image Gallery, ARS Nutrition Databases (sub-components), SoyBase, PeanutBase, National Fungus Collection, i5K Workspace @ NAL, and GRIN. We then searched using search engines such as Bing and Google for non-USDA / federal ag databases, using Boolean variations of “agricultural data” /“ag data” / “scientific data” + NOT + USDA (to filter out the federal / USDA results). Most of these results were domain specific, though some contained a mix of data subjects. We then used search engines such as Bing and Google to find top agricultural university repositories using variations of “agriculture”, “ag data” and “university” to find schools with agriculture programs. Using that list of universities, we searched each university web site to see if their institution had a repository for their unique, independent research data if not apparent in the initial web browser search. We found both ag specific university repositories and general university repositories that housed a portion of agricultural data. Ag specific university repositories are included in the list of domain-specific repositories. Results included Columbia University – International Research Institute for Climate and Society, UC Davis – Cover Crops Database, etc. If a general university repository existed, we determined whether that repository could filter to include only data results after our chosen ag search terms were applied. General university databases that contain ag data included Colorado State University Digital Collections, University of Michigan ICPSR (Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research), and University of Minnesota DRUM (Digital Repository of the University of Minnesota). We then split out NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information) repositories. Next we searched the internet for open general data repositories using a variety of search engines, and repositories containing a mix of data, journals, books, and other types of records were tested to determine whether that repository could filter for data results after search terms were applied. General subject data repositories include Figshare, Open Science Framework, PANGEA, Protein Data Bank, and Zenodo. Finally, we compared scholarly journal suggestions for data repositories against our list to fill in any missing repositories that might contain agricultural data. Extensive lists of journals were compiled, in which USDA published in 2012 and 2016, combining search results in ARIS, Scopus, and the Forest Service's TreeSearch, plus the USDA web sites Economic Research Service (ERS), National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Natural Resources and Conservation Service (NRCS), Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), Rural Development (RD), and Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). The top 50 journals' author instructions were consulted to see if they (a) ask or require submitters to provide supplemental data, or (b) require submitters to submit data to open repositories. Data are provided for Journals based on a 2012 and 2016 study of where USDA employees publish their research studies, ranked by number of articles, including 2015/2016 Impact Factor, Author guidelines, Supplemental Data?, Supplemental Data reviewed?, Open Data (Supplemental or in Repository) Required? and Recommended data repositories, as provided in the online author guidelines for each the top 50 journals. Evaluation We ran a series of searches on all resulting general subject databases with the designated search terms. From the results, we noted the total number of datasets in the repository, type of resource searched (datasets, data, images, components, etc.), percentage of the total database that each term comprised, any dataset with a search term that comprised at least 1% and 5% of the total collection, and any search term that returned greater than 100 and greater than 500 results. We compared domain-specific databases and repositories based on parent organization, type of institution, and whether data submissions were dependent on conditions such as funding or affiliation of some kind. Results A summary of the major findings from our data review:

Over half of the top 50 ag-related journals from our profile require or encourage open data for their published authors. There are few general repositories that are both large AND contain a significant portion of ag data in their collection. GBIF (Global Biodiversity Information Facility), ICPSR, and ORNL DAAC were among those that had over 500 datasets returned with at least one ag search term and had that result comprise at least 5% of the total collection.
Not even one quarter of the domain-specific repositories and datasets reviewed allow open submission by any researcher regardless of funding or affiliation.

See included README file for descriptions of each individual data file in this dataset. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Journals. File Name: Journals.csvResource Title: Journals - Recommended repositories. File Name: Repos_from_journals.csvResource Title: TDWG presentation. File Name: TDWG_Presentation.pptxResource Title: Domain Specific ag data sources. File Name: domain_specific_ag_databases.csvResource Title: Data Dictionary for Ag Data Repository Inventory. File Name: Ag_Data_Repo_DD.csvResource Title: General repositories containing ag data. File Name: general_repos_1.csvResource Title: README and file inventory. File Name: README_InventoryPublicDBandREepAgData.txt

This dataset consists of the Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas Version 2022 (SOCATv2022) data product files. The ocean absorbs one quarter of the global CO2 emissions from human activity. The community-led Surface Ocean CO2 Atlas (www.socat.info) is key for the quantification of ocean CO2 uptake and its variation, now and in the future. SOCAT version 2022 has quality-controlled in situ surface ocean fCO2 (fugacity of CO2) measurements on ships, moorings, autonomous and drifting surface platforms for the global oceans and coastal seas from 1957 to 2021. The main synthesis and gridded products contain 33.7 million fCO2 values with an estimated accuracy of better than 5 μatm. A further 6.4 million fCO2 sensor data with an estimated accuracy of 5 to 10 μatm are separately available. During quality control, marine scientists assign a flag to each data set, as well as WOCE flags of 2 (good), 3 (questionable) or 4 (bad) to individual fCO2 values. Data sets are assigned flags of A and B for an estimated accuracy of better than 2 μatm, flags of C and D for an accuracy of better than 5 μatm and a flag of E for an accuracy of better than 10 μatm. Bakker et al. (2016) describe the quality control criteria used in SOCAT versions 3 to 2022. Quality control comments for individual data sets can be accessed via the SOCAT Data Set Viewer (www.socat.info). All data sets, where data quality has been deemed acceptable, have been made public. The main SOCAT synthesis files and the gridded products contain all data sets with an estimated accuracy of better than 5 µatm (data set flags of A to D) and fCO2 values with a WOCE flag of 2. Access to data sets with an estimated accuracy of 5 to 10 (flag of E) and fCO2 values with flags of 3 and 4 is via additional data products and the Data Set Viewer (Table 8 in Bakker et al., 2016). SOCAT publishes a global gridded product with a 1° longitude by 1° latitude resolution. A second product with a higher resolution of 0.25° longitude by 0.25° latitude is available for the coastal seas. The gridded products contain all data sets with an estimated accuracy of better than 5 µatm (data set flags of A to D) and fCO2 values with a WOCE flag of 2. Gridded products are available monthly, per year and per decade. Two powerful, interactive, online viewers, the Data Set Viewer and the Gridded Data Viewer (www.socat.info), enable investigation of the SOCAT synthesis and gridded data products. SOCAT data products can be downloaded. Matlab code is available for reading these files. Ocean Data View also provides access to the SOCAT data products (www.socat.info). SOCAT data products are discoverable, accessible and citable. The SOCAT Data Use Statement (www.socat.info) asks users to generously acknowledge the contribution of SOCAT scientists by invitation to co-authorship, especially for data providers in regional studies, and/or reference to relevant scientific articles. The SOCAT website (www.socat.info) provides a single access point for online viewers, downloadable data sets, the Data Use Statement, a list of contributors and an overview of scientific publications on and using SOCAT. Automation of data upload and initial data checks allows annual releases of SOCAT from version 4 onwards. SOCAT is used for quantification of ocean CO2 uptake and ocean acidification and for evaluation of climate models and sensor data. SOCAT products inform the annual Global Carbon Budget since 2013. The annual SOCAT releases by the SOCAT scientific community are a Voluntary Commitment for United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14.3 (Reduce Ocean Acidification) (#OceanAction20464). More broadly the SOCAT releases contribute to UN SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and to the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development. Hundreds of peer-reviewed scientific publications and high-impact reports cite SOCAT. The SOCAT community-led synthesis product is a key step in the value chain based on in situ inorganic carbon measurements of the oceans, which provides policy makers with critical information on ocean CO2 uptake in climate negotiations. The need for accurate knowledge of global ocean CO2 uptake and its (future) variation makes sustained funding of in situ surface ocean CO2 observations imperative.

The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS) is the largest all-payer emergency department (ED) database in the United States. yielding national estimates of hospital-owned ED visits. Unweighted, it contains data from over 30 million ED visits each year. Weighted, it estimates roughly 145 million ED visits nationally. Developed through a Federal-State-Industry partnership sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HCUP data inform decision making at the national, State, and community levels. Sampled from the HCUP State Inpatient Databases (SID) and State Emergency Department Databases (SEDD), the HCUP NEDS can be used to create national and regional estimates of ED care. The SID contain information on patients initially seen in the ED and subsequently admitted to the same hospital. The SEDD capture information on ED visits that do not result in an admission (i.e., treat-and-release visits and transfers to another hospital). Developed through a Federal-State-Industry partnership sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, HCUP data inform decision making at the national, State, and community levels. The NEDS contain information about geographic characteristics, hospital characteristics, patient characteristics, and the nature of visits (e.g., common reasons for ED visits, including injuries). The NEDS contains clinical and resource use information included in a typical discharge abstract, with safeguards to protect the privacy of individual patients, physicians, and hospitals (as required by data sources). It includes ED charge information for over 85% of patients, regardless of expected payer, including but not limited to Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, self-pay, or those billed as ‘no charge’. The NEDS excludes data elements that could directly or indirectly identify individuals, hospitals, or states.Restricted access data files are available with a data use agreement and brief online security training.

• Audience Data 1P Data Audience ResolveID™ Platform - Audience Identity Cookieless Technology • Audience Data Identity Global US Graph – 670m + Identity Records • Access to 14 Billion Identity Consumer Profile Data Identifiers • Over 500+ Consumer Attributes, Online & Offline Data Behavior & Signals • IAB™ Seller-Defined Cookieless-Contextual Category – Intent & Behavior Signal Audience Cohorts
• Access to Customer Data Enrichment & Customer Data Ingestion • First-Party Data Ingestion & Data Appending

As of June 2024, the most popular database management system (DBMS) worldwide was Oracle, with a ranking score of *******; MySQL and Microsoft SQL server rounded out the top three. Although the database management industry contains some of the largest companies in the tech industry, such as Microsoft, Oracle and IBM, a number of free and open-source DBMSs such as PostgreSQL and MariaDB remain competitive. Database Management Systems As the name implies, DBMSs provide a platform through which developers can organize, update, and control large databases. Given the business world’s growing focus on big data and data analytics, knowledge of SQL programming languages has become an important asset for software developers around the world, and database management skills are seen as highly desirable. In addition to providing developers with the tools needed to operate databases, DBMS are also integral to the way that consumers access information through applications, which further illustrates the importance of the software.

Database Management Services Market Outlook

The global database management services market size was estimated at USD 20.5 billion in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 40.8 billion by 2032, growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 7.6% during the forecast period. A significant growth factor propelling this market includes the increasing digital transformation initiatives across various industries, driving the need for robust database management solutions.

One of the primary growth drivers for the database management services market is the exponential growth of data generated globally. Enterprises are increasingly digitizing their operations, generating massive volumes of data that need efficient management. Furthermore, the proliferation of cloud computing has made the storage and management of data more flexible and scalable, fueling the adoption of cloud-based database management services. Another critical aspect is the advent of big data analytics, which demands advanced database management systems to handle and process large datasets effectively.

The increasing adoption of advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and the Internet of Things (IoT) is also contributing significantly to the market's growth. These technologies require robust database management systems to store and analyze the vast amounts of data they generate. Businesses are recognizing the value of data-driven insights for making informed decisions, thereby accelerating the demand for sophisticated database management services. Additionally, regulatory requirements for data storage and management are becoming more stringent, compelling organizations to adopt advanced database management systems to ensure compliance.

The growing trend of remote work and the need for real-time data access also play a crucial role in the market's expansion. With more employees working remotely, the demand for seamless and secure data access has surged, leading to a higher need for effective database management solutions. Moreover, the rise of e-commerce and online services has led to an increased demand for efficient and scalable database management systems to handle customer data, transactions, and other critical information.

From a regional perspective, North America holds a significant share of the database management services market, primarily due to the presence of major technology companies and early adoption of advanced technologies. The Asia-Pacific region is expected to witness the highest growth rate during the forecast period, driven by rapid industrialization, increasing digitalization, and growing investments in IT infrastructure. Europe and Latin America are also experiencing steady growth, with organizations in these regions increasingly adopting database management solutions to enhance operational efficiency and drive business growth.

Service Type Analysis

Database management services can be segmented by service type into consulting, implementation, maintenance, and support. Consulting services involve providing expert advice and strategies for database management tailored to an organization’s specific needs. As businesses strive to integrate more sophisticated data solutions, the demand for consulting services is expected to grow. Consultants help identify the most suitable database management systems, optimize existing infrastructure, and ensure that data policies comply with regulatory standards, thus driving the segment's growth.

Implementation services encompass the deployment of database management systems and solutions within an organization. This segment is poised for significant growth as companies move towards modernizing their IT infrastructures. Implementation services ensure seamless integration of new systems with existing technologies, minimizing disruption and enhancing data accessibility and security. With the rise of cloud computing, implementation services are increasingly focused on migrating on-premises databases to cloud-based solutions, which offers scalability and cost-efficiency.

Maintenance services involve the ongoing management and upkeep of database systems to ensure their optimal performance. This includes regular updates, security patches, and troubleshooting to prevent downtime and data loss. As businesses become more reliant on data-driven operations, the importance of maintenance services cannot be overstated. These services ensure that databases remain functional, secure, and efficient, thereby supporting continuous business operations and data availabilit