This presentation was part of the Data Services and Open Access Publishing workshop, hosted by Hong Kong Baptist University Library.

The workshop looked to inform researchers of what librarians mean by green open access and data management was held during Open Access Week (October 2015), with many academic librarians, who work in digital scholarship and scholarly communication, also attending.

By focusing on the external causes of open access and data management, the presentation sought to clarify how librarians can assist researchers by expanding their research impact, comply with funding agency requirements regarding research data availability and train graduate students in best practices.

This table contains data on access to parks measured as the percent of population within ½ a mile of a parks, beach, open space or coastline for California, its regions, counties, county subdivisions, cities, towns, and census tracts. More information on the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the Data and Resources section. As communities become increasingly more urban, parks and the protection of green and open spaces within cities increase in importance. Parks and natural areas buffer pollutants and contribute to the quality of life by providing communities with social and psychological benefits such as leisure, play, sports, and contact with nature. Parks are critical to human health by providing spaces for health and wellness activities. The access to parks table is part of a series of indicators in the Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project (HCI) of the Office of Health Equity. The goal of HCI is to enhance public health by providing data, a standardized set of statistical measures, and tools that a broad array of sectors can use for planning healthy communities and evaluating the impact of plans, projects, policy, and environmental changes on community health. The creation of healthy social, economic, and physical environments that promote healthy behaviors and healthy outcomes requires coordination and collaboration across multiple sectors, including transportation, housing, education, agriculture and others. Statistical metrics, or indicators, are needed to help local, regional, and state public health and partner agencies assess community environments and plan for healthy communities that optimize public health. The format of the access to parks table is based on the standardized data format for all HCI indicators. As a result, this data table contains certain variables used in the HCI project (e.g., indicator ID, and indicator definition). Some of these variables may contain the same value for all observations.

One of the lines of research of Sustaining the Knowledge Commons (SKC) is a longitudinal study of the minority (about a third) of the fully open access journals that use this business model. The original idea was to gather data during an annual two-week census period. The volume of data and growth in this area makes this an impractical goal. For this reason, we are posting this preliminary dataset in case it might be helpful to others working in this area. Future data gathering and analysis will be conducted on an ongoing basis. Major sources of data for this dataset include: • the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) downloadable metadata; the base set is from May 2014, with some additional data from the 2015 dataset • data on publisher article processing charges and related information gathered from publisher websites by the SKC team in 2015, 2014 (Morris on, Salhab, Calvé-Genest & Horava, 2015) and a 2013 pilot • DOAJ article content data screen scraped from DOAJ (caution; this data can be quite misleading due to limitations with article-level metadata) • Subject analysis based on DOAJ subject metadata in 2014 for selected journals • Data on APCs gathered in 2010 by Solomon and Björk (supplied by the authors). Note that Solomon and Björk use a different method of calculating APC so the numbers are not directly comparable. • Note that this full d ataset includes some working columns which are meaningful only by means of explaining very specific calculations which are not necessarily evident in the dataset per se. Details below. Significant limitation: • This dataset does not include new journals added to DOAJ in 2015. A recent publisher size analysis indicates some significant changes. For example, DeGruyter, not listed in the 2014 survey, is now the third largest DOAJ publisher with over 200 titles. Elsevier is now the 7th largest DOAJ publisher. In both cases, gathering data from the publisher websites will be time-consuming as it is necessary to conduct individual title look-up. • Some OA APC data for newly added journals was gathered in May 2015 but has not yet been added to this dataset. One of the reasons for gathering this data is a comparison of the DOAJ "one price listed" approach with potentially richer data on the publisher's own website. For full details see the documentation.

This is a CSV file containing a listing of the top 60 articles published in the Journal of Digital Scholarship in the Humanities (JDSH, preciously LLC), as exported from the Altmetric Explorer tool on11 April 2017. The sheet has been manually annotated adding columns to indicate each article entry's corresponding License (column E) and Access Type (column F). License and Access Type data was crosschecked manually by accessing each article online individually. The file also contains data obtained from the Open Access Button API. The article DOIs as obtained from the Altmetric Explorer were run through the Open Access Button API on 15 May 2017 in order to discover if any of the published articles had open versions available. Any resulting links when available, were added to column O. Columns O and P also include additional information, when available, about the type of content available via the Open Access Button. Joe McArthur from the Open Access Button ran the first initial search for open surrogates of this dataset through the Open Access Button API. Ernesto Priego then manually crosschecked each entry and limited the final dataset to the top 60 articles (of 82). Please note that the Altmetric data for the JDSH is likely to have changed by now, though not too significantly. Altmetric scores have not been included in this file but the order of the entries correspond to the order in the data initially exported from the Altmetric Explorer (from most mentions to fiewer mentions, with a minimum of 1 mention). This dataset is part of the author and collaborator's ongoing research on open access and institutional repository uptake in the digital humanities. The data included in this file allows users to quickly quantify the number of JDSH articles published with open licenses, number of currently 'free', paywalled or open access articles. The data shared here also allows users to see which of the articles and/or their metadata (according to the Open Access Button API) have been deposited in institutional repositories. The data presented is the result of the specific methods employed to obtain the data. In this sense this data represents as much a testing of the technologies employed as of the actual articles' licensing and open availability. This means that data in columns L-P reflect the data available through the Open Access Button API at the moment of collection. It is perfectly possible that 'open surrogates' of the articles listed are available elsewhere through other methods. As indicated above data in columns E-F was obtained and added manually. Article DOI's were accessed manually from a computer browser outside/without access to university library networks, as the intention was to verify if any of the articles were available to the general public without university library network/subscription credentials.This deposit is part of a work in progress and is shared openly to document ongoing work and to encourage further discussion and analyses.

Three spatiotemporal data sets of drinking water hardness in Denmark (version 1) are presented here: (1) annual drinking water hardness at public waterworks (1905–2023); (2) annual drinking water hardness at their water supply areas (1978–2023) and (3) the latest drinking water hardness at the water supply areas (1980–2023). Raw data were extracted from the Jupiter database for groundwater and drinking water data in Denmark, and were quality-assured. Hardness was calculated after semi-automatic outlier exclusion based on Ca and Mg, or if not available, the reported total hardness. Data were further aggregated at the waterworks level by the annual mean and at the supply area level by the weighted mean (weighted to waterworks annual abstraction volumes). Temporal and spatial gaps were filled prior to these aggregations. Various stakeholders could benefit from these open access data. They provide a societal service in response to increased public interest in drinking water hardness. The research community could use the data in environmental, exposure or epidemiological assessments. Finally, the water supplies and the public sector could benefit from these data as they provide a nationwide overview of current and past drinking water hardness in Denmark and highlight the geographic areas that lack recent data, most probably due to de-regulation.

This dataset contains data collected during a study "Understanding the development of public data ecosystems: from a conceptual model to a six-generation model of the evolution of public data ecosystems" conducted by Martin Lnenicka (University of Hradec Králové, Czech Republic), Anastasija Nikiforova (University of Tartu, Estonia), Mariusz Luterek (University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland), Petar Milic (University of Pristina - Kosovska Mitrovica, Serbia), Daniel Rudmark (Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute, Sweden), Sebastian Neumaier (St. Pölten University of Applied Sciences, Austria), Karlo Kević (University of Zagreb, Croatia), Anneke Zuiderwijk (Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands), Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar (University of Granada, Granada, Spain).

As there is a lack of understanding of the elements that constitute different types of value-adding public data ecosystems and how these elements form and shape the development of these ecosystems over time, which can lead to misguided efforts to develop future public data ecosystems, the aim of the study is: (1) to explore how public data ecosystems have developed over time and (2) to identify the value-adding elements and formative characteristics of public data ecosystems. Using an exploratory retrospective analysis and a deductive approach, we systematically review 148 studies published between 1994 and 2023. Based on the results, this study presents a typology of public data ecosystems and develops a conceptual model of elements and formative characteristics that contribute most to value-adding public data ecosystems, and develops a conceptual model of the evolutionary generation of public data ecosystems represented by six generations called Evolutionary Model of Public Data Ecosystems (EMPDE). Finally, three avenues for a future research agenda are proposed.

This dataset is being made public both to act as supplementary data for "Understanding the development of public data ecosystems: from a conceptual model to a six-generation model of the evolution of public data ecosystems ", Telematics and Informatics*, and its Systematic Literature Review component that informs the study.

Description of the data in this data set

PublicDataEcosystem_SLR provides the structure of the protocol

Spreadsheet#1 provides the list of results after the search over three indexing databases and filtering out irrelevant studies

Spreadsheets #2 provides the protocol structure.

Spreadsheets #3 provides the filled protocol for relevant studies.

The information on each selected study was collected in four categories:(1) descriptive information,(2) approach- and research design- related information,(3) quality-related information,(4) HVD determination-related information

Descriptive Information

Article number

A study number, corresponding to the study number assigned in an Excel worksheet

Complete reference

The complete source information to refer to the study (in APA style), including the author(s) of the study, the year in which it was published, the study's title and other source information.

Year of publication

The year in which the study was published.

Journal article / conference paper / book chapter

The type of the paper, i.e., journal article, conference paper, or book chapter.

Journal / conference / book

Journal article, conference, where the paper is published.

DOI / Website

A link to the website where the study can be found.

Number of words

A number of words of the study.

Number of citations in Scopus and WoS

The number of citations of the paper in Scopus and WoS digital libraries.

Availability in Open Access

Availability of a study in the Open Access or Free / Full Access.

Keywords

Keywords of the paper as indicated by the authors (in the paper).

Relevance for our study (high / medium / low)

What is the relevance level of the paper for our study

Approach- and research design-related information

Approach- and research design-related information

Objective / Aim / Goal / Purpose & Research Questions

The research objective and established RQs.

Research method (including unit of analysis)

The methods used to collect data in the study, including the unit of analysis that refers to the country, organisation, or other specific unit that has been analysed such as the number of use-cases or policy documents, number and scope of the SLR etc.

Study’s contributions

The study’s contribution as defined by the authors

Qualitative / quantitative / mixed method

Whether the study uses a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods approach?

Availability of the underlying research data

Whether the paper has a reference to the public availability of the underlying research data e.g., transcriptions of interviews, collected data etc., or explains why these data are not openly shared?

Period under investigation

Period (or moment) in which the study was conducted (e.g., January 2021-March 2022)

Use of theory / theoretical concepts / approaches? If yes, specify them

Does the study mention any theory / theoretical concepts / approaches? If yes, what theory / concepts / approaches? If any theory is mentioned, how is theory used in the study? (e.g., mentioned to explain a certain phenomenon, used as a framework for analysis, tested theory, theory mentioned in the future research section).

Quality-related information

Quality concerns

Whether there are any quality concerns (e.g., limited information about the research methods used)?

Public Data Ecosystem-related information

Public data ecosystem definition

How is the public data ecosystem defined in the paper and any other equivalent term, mostly infrastructure. If an alternative term is used, how is the public data ecosystem called in the paper?

Public data ecosystem evolution / development

Does the paper define the evolution of the public data ecosystem? If yes, how is it defined and what factors affect it?

What constitutes a public data ecosystem?

What constitutes a public data ecosystem (components & relationships) - their "FORM / OUTPUT" presented in the paper (general description with more detailed answers to further additional questions).

Components and relationships

What components does the public data ecosystem consist of and what are the relationships between these components? Alternative names for components - element, construct, concept, item, helix, dimension etc. (detailed description).

Stakeholders

What stakeholders (e.g., governments, citizens, businesses, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) etc.) does the public data ecosystem involve?

Actors and their roles

What actors does the public data ecosystem involve? What are their roles?

Data (data types, data dynamism, data categories etc.)

What data do the public data ecosystem cover (is intended / designed for)? Refer to all data-related aspects, including but not limited to data types, data dynamism (static data, dynamic, real-time data, stream), prevailing data categories / domains / topics etc.

Processes / activities / dimensions, data lifecycle phases

What processes, activities, dimensions and data lifecycle phases (e.g., locate, acquire, download, reuse, transform, etc.) does the public data ecosystem involve or refer to?

Level (if relevant)

What is the level of the public data ecosystem covered in the paper? (e.g., city, municipal, regional, national (=country), supranational, international).

Other elements or relationships (if any)

What other elements or relationships does the public data ecosystem consist of?

Additional comments

Additional comments (e.g., what other topics affected the public data ecosystems and their elements, what is expected to affect the public data ecosystems in the future, what were important topics by which the period was characterised etc.).

New papers

Does the study refer to any other potentially relevant papers?

Additional references to potentially relevant papers that were found in the analysed paper (snowballing).

Format of the file.xls, .csv (for the first spreadsheet only), .docx

Licenses or restrictionsCC-BY

For more info, see README.txt

HHS responsibly shares “open by default” data with the public to democratize access to information, demystify the Department, and increase transparency through data sharing. HHS Open Data is non-sensitive data, meaning thousands of health and human services datasets are publicly available to fuel new business models, enable emerging technologies like AI, accelerate scientific discoveries, and inspire American innovation. This top-1000 HHS Open Data websites and resources page, dynamically generated from the Digital Analytics Program (DAP) provided by the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), is driven by near-real-time user demand. GSA’s DAP helps federal agencies and the public see how visitors find, access, and use government websites, data, and services online. The below list filters DAP for only resources from HHS and includes all HHS Divisions. You may filter by individual HHS Divisions and columns.

Big Data and Society Abstract & Indexing - ResearchHelpDesk - Big Data & Society (BD&S) is open access, peer-reviewed scholarly journal that publishes interdisciplinary work principally in the social sciences, humanities and computing and their intersections with the arts and natural sciences about the implications of Big Data for societies. The Journal's key purpose is to provide a space for connecting debates about the emerging field of Big Data practices and how they are reconfiguring academic, social, industry, business, and government relations, expertise, methods, concepts, and knowledge. BD&S moves beyond usual notions of Big Data and treats it as an emerging field of practice that is not defined by but generative of (sometimes) novel data qualities such as high volume and granularity and complex analytics such as data linking and mining. It thus attends to digital content generated through online and offline practices in social, commercial, scientific, and government domains. This includes, for instance, the content generated on the Internet through social media and search engines but also that which is generated in closed networks (commercial or government transactions) and open networks such as digital archives, open government, and crowdsourced data. Critically, rather than settling on a definition the Journal makes this an object of interdisciplinary inquiries and debates explored through studies of a variety of topics and themes. BD&S seeks contributions that analyze Big Data practices and/or involve empirical engagements and experiments with innovative methods while also reflecting on the consequences for how societies are represented (epistemologies), realized (ontologies) and governed (politics). Article processing charge (APC) The article processing charge (APC) for this journal is currently 1500 USD. Authors who do not have funding for open access publishing can request a waiver from the publisher, SAGE, once their Original Research Article is accepted after peer review. For all other content (Commentaries, Editorials, Demos) and Original Research Articles commissioned by the Editor, the APC will be waived. Abstract & Indexing Clarivate Analytics: Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) Google Scholar Scopus

A Comprehensive List of Open Data Portals from Around the World

Open Data Commons Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL) v1.0 DISCLAIMER Open Data Commons is not a law firm and does not provide legal services of any kind.

Open Data Commons has no formal relationship with you. Your receipt of this document does not create any kind of agent-client relationship. Please seek the advice of a suitably qualified legal professional licensed to practice in your jurisdiction before using this document.

No warranties and disclaimer of any damages.

This information is provided ‘as is‘, and this site makes no warranties on the information provided. Any damages resulting from its use are disclaimed.

Read the full disclaimer. A plain language summary of the Public Domain Dedication and License is available as well as a plain text version.

Public Domain Dedication and License (PDDL) PREAMBLE The Open Data Commons – Public Domain Dedication and Licence is a document intended to allow you to freely share, modify, and use this work for any purpose and without any restrictions. This licence is intended for use on databases or their contents (“data”), either together or individually.

Many databases are covered by copyright. Some jurisdictions, mainly in Europe, have specific special rights that cover databases called the “sui generis” database right. Both of these sets of rights, as well as other legal rights used to protect databases and data, can create uncertainty or practical difficulty for those wishing to share databases and their underlying data but retain a limited amount of rights under a “some rights reserved” approach to licensing as outlined in the Science Commons Protocol for Implementing Open Access Data. As a result, this waiver and licence tries to the fullest extent possible to eliminate or fully license any rights that cover this database and data. Any Community Norms or similar statements of use of the database or data do not form a part of this document, and do not act as a contract for access or other terms of use for the database or data.

THE POSITION OF THE RECIPIENT OF THE WORK Because this document places the database and its contents in or as close as possible within the public domain, there are no restrictions or requirements placed on the recipient by this document. Recipients may use this work commercially, use technical protection measures, combine this data or database with other databases or data, and share their changes and additions or keep them secret. It is not a requirement that recipients provide further users with a copy of this licence or attribute the original creator of the data or database as a source. The goal is to eliminate restrictions held by the original creator of the data and database on the use of it by others.

THE POSITION OF THE DEDICATOR OF THE WORK Copyright law, as with most other law under the banner of “intellectual property”, is inherently national law. This means that there exists several differences in how copyright and other IP rights can be relinquished, waived or licensed in the many legal jurisdictions of the world. This is despite much harmonisation of minimum levels of protection. The internet and other communication technologies span these many disparate legal jurisdictions and thus pose special difficulties for a document relinquishing and waiving intellectual property rights, including copyright and database rights, for use by the global community. Because of this feature of intellectual property law, this document first relinquishes the rights and waives the relevant rights and claims. It then goes on to license these same rights for jurisdictions or areas of law that may make it difficult to relinquish or waive rights or claims.

The purpose of this document is to enable rightsholders to place their work into the public domain. Unlike licences for free and open source software, free cultural works, or open content licences, rightsholders will not be able to “dual license” their work by releasing the same work under different licences. This is because they have allowed anyone to use the work in whatever way they choose. Rightsholders therefore can’t re-license it under copyright or database rights on different terms because they have nothing left to license. Doing so creates truly accessible data to build rich applications and advance the progress of science and the arts.

This document can cover either or both of the database and its contents (the data). Because databases can have a wide variety of content – not just factual data – rightsholders should use the Open Data Commons – Public Domain Dedication & Licence for an entire database and its contents only if everything can be placed under the terms of this document. Because even factual data can sometimes have intellectual property rights, rightsholders should use this licence to cover b...

A detailed description of the variables used can be found in Section 3 - Data and definition of variables - of the paper entitled "Open access to data: An ideal professed but not practiced", published in: Research Policy, 43(9), 2014, 1621-1633. For a description of how the citation data was generated please see the uploaded paper entitled "A brief guide for the creation of author-specific citation metrics and publication data using the Thomson Reuters Web of Science and Scopus Databases" by Mueller-Langer et al. (2013).

Each data entry has following 39 items.

1 NO: ID number

2 DB: SCI/SSCI/AHCI

3 Thomson DB_Authors

4 Thomson DB_Document Title

5 Thomson DB_Publication Name

6 Thomson DB_Publisher

7 Thomson DB_DOI

8 Thomson DB_Language

9 Thomson DB_Web of Science Category (WC)

10 Category:14 subject disciplines integrated from 200 Web of Science category

11 Group:A/B/C/D

12 OA/NOA :OA articles/Electronic subscription journal articles/Not available online

13 Means for making articles OA_Subject Repositories

14 Means for making articles OA_Full OA journals

15 Means for making articles OA_Delayed OA

16 Means for making articles OA_Hybrid Journals

17 Means for making articles OA_Complementary OA

18 Means for making articles OA_IRs

19 Means for making articles OA_Personal/institutional websites

20 Means for making articles OA_Academic SNS

21 Means for making articles OA_Others

22 Number of means of making OA

23 Subject Repositories_PMC/EuroPMC

24 Subject Repositories_arXiv

25 Subject Repositories_citeseerx

26 Subject Repositories_HAL

27 Subject Repositories_inspirehep

28 Subject Repositories_SSRN

29 Academic SNS_Researchgate

30 Academic SNS_Academia.edu

31 Academic SNS_Readcube

32 Others_ScienceOpen

33 Others_InternetArchive

34 OA Sites (URL)_Subject Repositories

35 OA Sites (URL)_Journals’ website

36 OA Sites (URL)_IRs ; Personal/institutional websites

37 OA Sites (URL)_Academic SNS

38 OA Sites (URL)_Others

39 Electronic subscription journal articles:Yes=1, No=0

The NSF Public Access Repository contains an initial collection of journal publications and the final accepted version of the peer-reviewed manuscript or the version of record. To do this, NSF draws upon services provided by the publisher community including the Clearinghouse of Open Research for the United States, CrossRef, and International Standard Serial Number. When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not be available without a charge during the embargo, or administrative interval. Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this website.

This dataset contains data collected during a study ("Towards High-Value Datasets determination for data-driven development: a systematic literature review") conducted by Anastasija Nikiforova (University of Tartu), Nina Rizun, Magdalena Ciesielska (Gdańsk University of Technology), Charalampos Alexopoulos (University of the Aegean) and Andrea Miletič (University of Zagreb)
It being made public both to act as supplementary data for "Towards High-Value Datasets determination for data-driven development: a systematic literature review" paper (pre-print is available in Open Access here -> https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.10234) and in order for other researchers to use these data in their own work.

The protocol is intended for the Systematic Literature review on the topic of High-value Datasets with the aim to gather information on how the topic of High-value datasets (HVD) and their determination has been reflected in the literature over the years and what has been found by these studies to date, incl. the indicators used in them, involved stakeholders, data-related aspects, and frameworks. The data in this dataset were collected in the result of the SLR over Scopus, Web of Science, and Digital Government Research library (DGRL) in 2023.

***Methodology***

To understand how HVD determination has been reflected in the literature over the years and what has been found by these studies to date, all relevant literature covering this topic has been studied. To this end, the SLR was carried out to by searching digital libraries covered by Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), Digital Government Research library (DGRL).

These databases were queried for keywords ("open data" OR "open government data") AND ("high-value data*" OR "high value data*"), which were applied to the article title, keywords, and abstract to limit the number of papers to those, where these objects were primary research objects rather than mentioned in the body, e.g., as a future work. After deduplication, 11 articles were found unique and were further checked for relevance. As a result, a total of 9 articles were further examined. Each study was independently examined by at least two authors.

To attain the objective of our study, we developed the protocol, where the information on each selected study was collected in four categories: (1) descriptive information, (2) approach- and research design- related information, (3) quality-related information, (4) HVD determination-related information.

***Test procedure***
Each study was independently examined by at least two authors, where after the in-depth examination of the full-text of the article, the structured protocol has been filled for each study.
The structure of the survey is available in the supplementary file available (see Protocol_HVD_SLR.odt, Protocol_HVD_SLR.docx)
The data collected for each study by two researchers were then synthesized in one final version by the third researcher.

***Description of the data in this data set***

Protocol_HVD_SLR provides the structure of the protocol
Spreadsheets #1 provides the filled protocol for relevant studies.
Spreadsheet#2 provides the list of results after the search over three indexing databases, i.e. before filtering out irrelevant studies

The information on each selected study was collected in four categories:
(1) descriptive information,
(2) approach- and research design- related information,
(3) quality-related information,
(4) HVD determination-related information

Descriptive information
1) Article number - a study number, corresponding to the study number assigned in an Excel worksheet
2) Complete reference - the complete source information to refer to the study
3) Year of publication - the year in which the study was published
4) Journal article / conference paper / book chapter - the type of the paper -{journal article, conference paper, book chapter}
5) DOI / Website- a link to the website where the study can be found
6) Number of citations - the number of citations of the article in Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science
7) Availability in OA - availability of an article in the Open Access
8) Keywords - keywords of the paper as indicated by the authors
9) Relevance for this study - what is the relevance level of the article for this study? {high / medium / low}

Approach- and research design-related information
10) Objective / RQ - the research objective / aim, established research questions
11) Research method (including unit of analysis) - the methods used to collect data, including the unit of analy-sis (country, organisation, specific unit that has been ana-lysed, e.g., the number of use-cases, scope of the SLR etc.)
12) Contributions - the contributions of the study
13) Method - whether the study uses a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods approach?
14) Availability of the underlying research data- whether there is a reference to the publicly available underly-ing research data e.g., transcriptions of interviews, collected data, or explanation why these data are not shared?
15) Period under investigation - period (or moment) in which the study was conducted
16) Use of theory / theoretical concepts / approaches - does the study mention any theory / theoretical concepts / approaches? If any theory is mentioned, how is theory used in the study?

Quality- and relevance- related information
17) Quality concerns - whether there are any quality concerns (e.g., limited infor-mation about the research methods used)?
18) Primary research object - is the HVD a primary research object in the study? (primary - the paper is focused around the HVD determination, sec-ondary - mentioned but not studied (e.g., as part of discus-sion, future work etc.))

HVD determination-related information
19) HVD definition and type of value - how is the HVD defined in the article and / or any other equivalent term?
20) HVD indicators - what are the indicators to identify HVD? How were they identified? (components & relationships, “input -> output")
21) A framework for HVD determination - is there a framework presented for HVD identification? What components does it consist of and what are the rela-tionships between these components? (detailed description)
22) Stakeholders and their roles - what stakeholders or actors does HVD determination in-volve? What are their roles?
23) Data - what data do HVD cover?
24) Level (if relevant) - what is the level of the HVD determination covered in the article? (e.g., city, regional, national, international)

***Format of the file***
.xls, .csv (for the first spreadsheet only), .odt, .docx

***Licenses or restrictions***
CC-BY

For more info, see README.txt

This dataset includes a file with results from a survey sent to authors of open access monographs. The survey was available during March–April 2019 and the results are analysed in a paper presented at the 2019 Elpub conference on Jun 2–4 in Marseille, France entitled 'The significant difference in impact – an exploratory study about the meaning and value of metrics for open access monographs'. Version 2 of the dataset has been updated with the slides presented at the conference and the link to the full paper published in the French open archive HAL.

The respondents of the survey were asked to comment on assumptions about bibliometrics and altmetrics currently in practice, and to think about the meaning of such data in relation to their experiences as authors of books published in a digital format and with an open license (i.e. a creative commons license). The survey questionnaire is included as a separate text document. The dataset also includes measures about the usage of open access books published by Stockholm University Press, including information about online usage, mentions in social media and citations. This data is collected from the publisher's platform, the Altmetric.com database, and citation data was collected from Dimensions, Google Scholar, Web of Science and CrossRef. The data was collected in February 2019, except for the figures from the OAPEN Library database, which was collected in November 2018. The paper, including the analysis of these data, is to be published in the Elpub Digital Library. The tables included in the dataset may vary slightly from those in the published paper, due to space restraints in the published version.

On October 15, 2013, Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer announced the signing of an open data policy executive order in conjunction with his compelling talk at the 2013 Code for America Summit. In nonchalant cadence, the mayor announced his support for complete information disclosure by declaring, "It's data, man."Sunlight Foundation - New Louisville Open Data Policy Insists Open By Default is the Future Open Data Annual ReportsSection 5.A. Within one year of the effective Data of this Executive Order, and thereafter no later than September 1 of each year, the Open Data Management Team shall submit to the Mayor an annual Open Data Report.The Open Data Management team (also known as the Data Governance Team is currently led by the city's Data Officer Andrew McKinney in the Office of Civic Innovation and Technology. Previously (2014-16) it was led by the Director of IT.Full Executive OrderEXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 1, SERIES 2013AN EXECUTIVE ORDERCREATING AN OPEN DATA PLAN. WHEREAS, Metro Government is the catalyst for creating a world-class city that provides its citizens with safe and vibrant neighborhoods, great jobs, a strong system of education and innovation, and a high quality of life; andWHEREAS, it should be easy to do business with Metro Government. Online government interactions mean more convenient services for citizens and businesses and online government interactions improve the cost effectiveness and accuracy of government operations; andWHEREAS, an open government also makes certain that every aspect of the built environment also has reliable digital descriptions available to citizens and entrepreneurs for deep engagement mediated by smart devices; andWHEREAS, every citizen has the right to prompt, efficient service from Metro Government; andWHEREAS, the adoption of open standards improves transparency, access to public information and improved coordination and efficiencies among Departments and partner organizations across the public, nonprofit and private sectors; andWHEREAS, by publishing structured standardized data in machine readable formats the Louisville Metro Government seeks to encourage the local software community to develop software applications and tools to collect, organize, and share public record data in new and innovative ways; andWHEREAS, in commitment to the spirit of Open Government, Louisville Metro Government will consider public information to be open by default and will proactively publish data and data containing information, consistent with the Kentucky Open Meetings and Open Records Act; andNOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROMULGATED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER OF THE HONORABLE GREG FISCHER, MAYOR OF LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT AS FOLLOWS:Section 1. Definitions. As used in this Executive Order, the terms below shall have the following definitions:(A) “Open Data” means any public record as defined by the Kentucky Open Records Act, which could be made available online using Open Format data, as well as best practice Open Data structures and formats when possible. Open Data is not information that is treated exempt under KRS 61.878 by Metro Government.(B) “Open Data Report” is the annual report of the Open Data Management Team, which shall (i) summarize and comment on the state of Open Data availability in Metro Government Departments from the previous year; (ii) provide a plan for the next year to improve online public access to Open Data and maintain data quality. The Open Data Management Team shall present an initial Open Data Report to the Mayor within 180 days of this Executive Order.(C) “Open Format” is any widely accepted, nonproprietary, platform-independent, machine-readable method for formatting data, which permits automated processing of such data and is accessible to external search capabilities.(D) “Open Data Portal” means the Internet site established and maintained by or on behalf of Metro Government, located at portal.louisvilleky.gov/service/data or its successor website.(E) “Open Data Management Team” means a group consisting of representatives from each Department within Metro Government and chaired by the Chief Information Officer (CIO) that is responsible for coordinating implementation of an Open Data Policy and creating the Open Data Report.(F) “Department” means any Metro Government department, office, administrative unit, commission, board, advisory committee, or other division of Metro Government within the official jurisdiction of the executive branch.Section 2. Open Data Portal.(A) The Open Data Portal shall serve as the authoritative source for Open Data provided by Metro Government(B) Any Open Data made accessible on Metro Government’s Open Data Portal shall use an Open Format.Section 3. Open Data Management Team.(A) The Chief Information Officer (CIO) of Louisville Metro Government will work with the head of each Department to identify a Data Coordinator in each Department. Data Coordinators will serve as members of an Open Data Management Team facilitated by the CIO and Metro Technology Services. The Open Data Management Team will work to establish a robust, nationally recognized, platform that addresses digital infrastructure and Open Data.(B) The Open Data Management Team will develop an Open Data management policy that will adopt prevailing Open Format standards for Open Data, and develop agreements with regional partners to publish and maintain Open Data that is open and freely available while respecting exemptions allowed by the Kentucky Open Records Act or other federal or state law.Section 4. Department Open Data Catalogue.(A) Each Department shall be responsible for creating an Open Data catalogue, which will include comprehensive inventories of information possessed and/or managed by the Department.(B) Each Department’s Open Data catalogue will classify information holdings as currently “public” or “not yet public”; Departments will work with Metro Technology Services to develop strategies and timelines for publishing open data containing information in a way that is complete, reliable, and has a high level of detail.Section 5. Open Data Report and Policy Review.(A) Within one year of the effective date of this Executive Order, and thereafter no later than September 1 of each year, the Open Data Management Team shall submit to the Mayor an annual Open Data Report.(B) In acknowledgment that technology changes rapidly, in the future, the Open Data Policy should be reviewed and considered for revisions or additions that will continue to position Metro Government as a leader on issues of openness, efficiency, and technical best practices.Section 6. This Executive Order shall take effect as of October 11, 2013.Signed this 11th day of October, 2013, by Greg Fischer, Mayor of Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government.GREG FISCHER, MAYOR

The data in this set was culled from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Proquest database Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), and a sample of peer reviewed scholarly journals in the field of Library Science. The data include journals that are open access, which was first defined by the Budapest Open Access Initiative: By ‘open access’ to [scholarly] literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Starting with a batch of 377 journals, we focused our dataset to include journals that met the following criteria: 1) peer-reviewed 2) written in English or abstracted in English, 3) actively published at the time of..., Data Collection In the spring of 2023, researchers gathered 377 scholarly journals whose content covered the work of librarians, archivists, and affiliated information professionals. This data encompassed 221 journals from the Proquest database Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), widely regarded as an authoritative database in the field of librarianship. From the Directory of Open Access Journals, we included 144 LIS journals. We also included 12 other journals not indexed in DOAJ or LISA, based on the researchers’ knowledge of existing OA library journals. The data is separated into several different sets representing the different indices and journals we searched. The first set includes journals from the database LISA. The following fields are in this dataset:

Journal: title of the journal

Publisher: title of the publishing company

Open Data Policy: lists whether an open data exists and what the policy is

Country of publication: country where the journal is publ..., , # Open access practices of selected library science journals

The data in this set was culled from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Proquest database Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), and a sample of peer reviewed scholarly journals in the field of Library Science.

The data include journals that are open access, which was first defined by the Budapest Open Access Initiative:Â

By ‘open access’ to [scholarly] literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.

Starting with a batch of 377 journals, we focused our dataset to include journals that met the following criteria: 1) peer-reviewed 2) written in Engli...

FSL5.0

Collection description

IMPORTANT:

This is open access data. You must agree to Terms and conditions of using this data before using it, available at:

http://humanconnectome.org/data/data-use-terms/open-access.html

Open Access Data (all imaging data and most of the behavioral data) is available to those who register an account at ConnectomeDB and agree to the Open Access Data Use Terms. This includes agreement to comply with institutional rules and regulations.

This means you may need the approval of your IRB or Ethics Committee to use the data. The released HCP data are not considered de-identified, since certain combinations of HCP Restricted Data (available through a separate process) might allow identification of individuals. Different national, state and local laws may apply and be interpreted differently, so it is important that you consult with your IRB or Ethics Committee before beginning your research. If needed and upon request, the HCP will provide a certificate stating that you have accepted the HCP Open Access Data Use Terms.

Please note that everyone who works with HCP open access data must review and agree to these terms, including those who are accessing shared copies of this data. If you are sharing HCP Open Access data, please advise your co-researchers that they must register with ConnectomeDB and agree to these terms.

Register and sign the Open Access Data Use Terms at ConnectomeDB:

https://db.humanconnectome.org/

Preprocessing Details:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23668970

T-stat maps were generated with FSL's randomise:

randomise -i 4D -o OneSampT -1 -T

and the package TtoZ was used to generate the Z-stat maps:

https://github.com/vsoch/TtoZ

Tasks:
http://humanconnectome.org/documentation/S500/HCP_S500+MEG2_Release_Appendix_VI.pdf

Subject species

homo sapiens

Modality

fMRI-BOLD

Analysis level

group

Cognitive paradigm (task)

language processing fMRI task paradigm

Map type

Z

On October 15, 2013, Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer announced the signing of an open data policy executive order in conjunction with his compelling talk at the 2013 Code for America Summit. In nonchalant cadence, the mayor announced his support for complete information disclosure by declaring, "It's data, man."Sunlight Foundation - New Louisville Open Data Policy Insists Open By Default is the Future Open Data Annual ReportsSection 5.A. Within one year of the effective Data of this Executive Order, and thereafter no later than September 1 of each year, the Open Data Management Team shall submit to the Mayor an annual Open Data Report.The Open Data Management team (also known as the Data Governance Team is currently led by the city's Data Officer Andrew McKinney in the Office of Civic Innovation and Technology. Previously (2014-16) it was led by the Director of IT.Full Executive OrderEXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 1, SERIES 2013AN EXECUTIVE ORDERCREATING AN OPEN DATA PLAN. WHEREAS, Metro Government is the catalyst for creating a world-class city that provides its citizens with safe and vibrant neighborhoods, great jobs, a strong system of education and innovation, and a high quality of life; andWHEREAS, it should be easy to do business with Metro Government. Online government interactions mean more convenient services for citizens and businesses and online government interactions improve the cost effectiveness and accuracy of government operations; andWHEREAS, an open government also makes certain that every aspect of the built environment also has reliable digital descriptions available to citizens and entrepreneurs for deep engagement mediated by smart devices; andWHEREAS, every citizen has the right to prompt, efficient service from Metro Government; andWHEREAS, the adoption of open standards improves transparency, access to public information and improved coordination and efficiencies among Departments and partner organizations across the public, nonprofit and private sectors; andWHEREAS, by publishing structured standardized data in machine readable formats the Louisville Metro Government seeks to encourage the local software community to develop software applications and tools to collect, organize, and share public record data in new and innovative ways; andWHEREAS, in commitment to the spirit of Open Government, Louisville Metro Government will consider public information to be open by default and will proactively publish data and data containing information, consistent with the Kentucky Open Meetings and Open Records Act; andNOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROMULGATED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER OF THE HONORABLE GREG FISCHER, MAYOR OF LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT AS FOLLOWS:Section 1. Definitions. As used in this Executive Order, the terms below shall have the following definitions:(A) “Open Data” means any public record as defined by the Kentucky Open Records Act, which could be made available online using Open Format data, as well as best practice Open Data structures and formats when possible. Open Data is not information that is treated exempt under KRS 61.878 by Metro Government.(B) “Open Data Report” is the annual report of the Open Data Management Team, which shall (i) summarize and comment on the state of Open Data availability in Metro Government Departments from the previous year; (ii) provide a plan for the next year to improve online public access to Open Data and maintain data quality. The Open Data Management Team shall present an initial Open Data Report to the Mayor within 180 days of this Executive Order.(C) “Open Format” is any widely accepted, nonproprietary, platform-independent, machine-readable method for formatting data, which permits automated processing of such data and is accessible to external search capabilities.(D) “Open Data Portal” means the Internet site established and maintained by or on behalf of Metro Government, located at portal.louisvilleky.gov/service/data or its successor website.(E) “Open Data Management Team” means a group consisting of representatives from each Department within Metro Government and chaired by the Chief Information Officer (CIO) that is responsible for coordinating implementation of an Open Data Policy and creating the Open Data Report.(F) “Department” means any Metro Government department, office, administrative unit, commission, board, advisory committee, or other division of Metro Government within the official jurisdiction of the executive branch.Section 2. Open Data Portal.(A) The Open Data Portal shall serve as the authoritative source for Open Data provided by Metro Government(B) Any Open Data made accessible on Metro Government’s Open Data Portal shall use an Open Format.Section 3. Open Data Management Team.(A) The Chief Information Officer (CIO) of Louisville Metro Government will work with the head of each Department to identify a Data Coordinator in each Department. Data Coordinators will serve as members of an Open Data Management Team facilitated by the CIO and Metro Technology Services. The Open Data Management Team will work to establish a robust, nationally recognized, platform that addresses digital infrastructure and Open Data.(B) The Open Data Management Team will develop an Open Data management policy that will adopt prevailing Open Format standards for Open Data, and develop agreements with regional partners to publish and maintain Open Data that is open and freely available while respecting exemptions allowed by the Kentucky Open Records Act or other federal or state law.Section 4. Department Open Data Catalogue.(A) Each Department shall be responsible for creating an Open Data catalogue, which will include comprehensive inventories of information possessed and/or managed by the Department.(B) Each Department’s Open Data catalogue will classify information holdings as currently “public” or “not yet public”; Departments will work with Metro Technology Services to develop strategies and timelines for publishing open data containing information in a way that is complete, reliable, and has a high level of detail.Section 5. Open Data Report and Policy Review.(A) Within one year of the effective date of this Executive Order, and thereafter no later than September 1 of each year, the Open Data Management Team shall submit to the Mayor an annual Open Data Report.(B) In acknowledgment that technology changes rapidly, in the future, the Open Data Policy should be reviewed and considered for revisions or additions that will continue to position Metro Government as a leader on issues of openness, efficiency, and technical best practices.Section 6. This Executive Order shall take effect as of October 11, 2013.Signed this 11th day of October, 2013, by Greg Fischer, Mayor of Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government.GREG FISCHER, MAYOR

———————————————————————————————— ORIGINAL PAPERS ———————————————————————————————— Mano, Marsel, Anatole Lécuyer, Elise Bannier, Lorraine Perronnet, Saman Noorzadeh, and Christian Barillot. 2017. “How to Build a Hybrid Neurofeedback Platform Combining EEG and FMRI.” Frontiers in Neuroscience 11 (140). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2017.00140 Perronnet, Lorraine, L Anatole, Marsel Mano, Maureen Clerc, Fabien Lotte, and Christian Barillot. 2018. “Learning 2-in-1 : Towards Integrated EEG-FMRI-Neurofeedback.” BioRxiv, no. 397729. https://doi.org/10.1101/397729.

———————————————————————————————— OVERVIEW ———————————————————————————————— This dataset XP2 can be pull together with the dataset XP1, available here :

———————————————————————————————— EXPERIMENTAL PARADIGM ————————————————————————————————

The experimental protocol consisted of 5 EEG-fMRI runs with a 20s block design alternating rest and task. 1 block = 20s rest + 20s task. Task description : _task-MIpre : motor imagery run without NF. 8 blocks. _task-1dNF or _task-2dNF : bimodal neurofeedback, with either a mono-dimensional neurofeedback display (mean of EEG NF and fMRI NF scores), either a bi-dimensional display (one modality per dimension). The list of subjects with 1d or 2d is given above. Each subjects had 3 runs. 8 blocks per run. _task-MIpost : motor imagery run without NF. 8 blocks. Subjects with mono-dimensional feedback display : xp201 : 1D xp202 : 1D xp203 : 1D xp206 : 1D xp211 : 1D xp218 : 1D xp219 : 1D xp220 : 1D xp222 : 1D

Subjects with bi-dimensional feedback display : xp204 : 2D xp205 : 2D xp207 : 2D xp213 : 2D xp216 : 2D xp217 : 2D xp221 : 2D

———————————————————————————————— EEG DATA ———————————————————————————————— EEG data was recorded using a 64-channel MR compatible solution from Brain Products (Brain Products GmbH, Gilching, Germany).

RAW EEG DATA

EEG was sampled at 5kHz with FCz as the reference electrode and AFz as the ground electrode, and a resolution of 0.5 microV. Following the BIDs arborescence, raw eeg data for each task can be found for each subject in

XP2/sub-xp2*/eeg

in Brain Vision Recorder format (File Version 1.0). Each raw EEG recording includes three files: the data file (.eeg), the header file (.vhdr) and the marker file (*.vmrk). The header file contains information about acquisition parameters and amplifier setup. For each electrode, the impedance at the beginning of the recording is also specified. For all subjects, channel 32 is the ECG channel. The 63 other channels are EEG channels.

The marker file contains the list of markers assigned to the EEG recordings and their properties (marker type, marker ID and position in data points). Three type of markers are relevant for the EEG processing: R128 (Response): is the fMRI volume marker to correct for the gradient artifact S 99 (Stimulus): is the protocol marker indicating the start of the Rest block S 2 (Stimulus): is the protocol marker indicating the start of the Task (Motor Execution Motor Imagery or Neurofeedback)
Warning : in few EEG data, the first S99 marker might be missing, but can be easily “added” 20 s before the first S 2.

PREPROCESSED EEG DATA

Following the BIDs arborescence, processed eeg data for each task can be found for each subject in

XP2/derivatives/sub-xp2*/eeg_pp/*eeg_pp.*

and following the Brain Analyzer format. Each processed EEG recording includes three files: the data file (.dat), the header file (.vhdr) and the marker file (*.vmrk), containing information similar to those described for raw data. In the header file of preprocessed data channels location are also specified. In the marker file the location in data points of the identified heart pulse (R marker) are specified as well.

EEG data were pre-processed using BrainVision Analyzer II Software, with the following steps: Automatic gradient artifact correction using the artifact template subtraction method (Sliding average calculation with 21 intervals for sliding average and all channels enabled for correction. Downsampling with factor: 25 (200 Hz) Low Pass FIR Filter:Cut-off Frequency: 50 Hz. Ballistocardiogram (pulse) artifact correction using a semiautomatic procedure (Pulse Template searched between 40 s and 240 s in the ECG channel with the following parameters:Coherence Trigger = 0.5, Minimal Amplitude = 0.5, Maximal Amplitude = 1.3). A Pulse Artifact marker R was associated to each identified pulse. Segmentation relative to the first block marker (S 99) for all the length of the training protocol (las S 2 + 20 s).

EEG-NF SCORES

Neurofeedback scores can be found in the .mat structures in

XP2/derivatives/sub-xp2*/NF_eeg/d_sub*NFeeg_scores.mat

Structures names NF_eeg are composed by the following subfields: ID : Subject ID, for example sub-xp201 lapC3_ERD : a 1x1280 vector of neurofeedback scores. 4 scores per secondes, for the whole session. eeg : a 64x80200 matrix, with the pre-processed EEG signals with the step described above, filtered between 8 and 30 Hz. lapC3_bandpower_8Hz_30Hz : 1x1280 vector. Bandpower of the filtered signal with a laplacian centred on C3, used to estimate the lapC3_ERD. lapC3_filter : 1x64 vector. Laplacian filter centred above C3 channel. ———————————————————————————————— BOLD fMRI DATA ———————————————————————————————— All DICOM files were converted to Nifti-1 and then in BIDs format (version 2.1.4) using the software dcm2niix (version v1.0.20190720 GVV7.4.0)

fMRI acquisitions were performed using echo- planar imaging (EPI) and covered the superior half of the brain with the following parameters 3T Siemens Verio EPI sequence TR=1 s TE=23 ms Resolution 2x2x4 mm N of slices: 16 No slice gap

As specified in the relative task event files in XP2\ *events.tsv files onset, the scanner began the EPI pulse sequence two seconds prior to the start of the protocol (first rest block), so the the first two TRs should be discarded.

The useful TRs for the runs are therefore

-task-MIpre and task-MIpost: 320 s (2 to 302) -task-1dNF and task-2dNF: 320 s (2 to 302)

In task events files for the different tasks, each column represents:

• 'onset': onset time (sec) of an event
• 'duration': duration (sec) of the event
• 'trial_type': trial (block) type: rest or task (Rest, Task-MI, Task-NF)
• 'stim_file': image presented in a stimulus block. During Rest or Motor Imagery (Task-MI) instructions were presented to the subject. On the other hand, during Neurofeedback blocks (Task-NF) the image presented was a ball moving in a square for the bidimensional NF (task-2dNF) or a ball moving along a gauge for the unidimensional NF (task-1dNF) that the subject could control self-regulating his EEG and fMRI brain activity.

Following the BIDs arborescence, the functional data and relative metadata are found for each subject in the following directory

XP2/sub-xp2*/func

BOLD-NF SCORES

For each subject and NF session, a matlab structure with BOLD-NF features can be found in

XP2/derivatives/sub-xp2*/NF_bold/

In view of BOLD-NF scores computation, fMRI data were preprocessed using AutoMRI, a software based on spm8 and with the following steps: slice-time correction, spatial realignment and coregistration with the anatomical scan, spatial smoothing with a 8 mm Gaussian kernel and normalization to the Montreal Neurological Institute template For each session, a first level general linear model analysis modeling was then performed. The resulting activation maps (voxel-wise Family-Wise error corrected at p < 0.05) were used to define two ROIs (9x9x3 voxels) around the maximum of activation in the ipsilesional primary motor area (M1) and supplementary motor area (SMA) respectively.

The BOLD-NF scores were calculated as the difference between percentage signal change in the two ROIs (SMA and M1) and a large deep background region (slice 3 out of 16) whose activity is not correlated with the NF task. A smoothed version of the NF scores over the precedent three volumes was also computed.

The NF_boldi structure has the following structure

NF_bold → .m1→ .nf → .smoothnf
→ .roimean (averaged BOLD signal in the ROI) → .bgmean (averaged BOLD signal in the background slice) → .method
NFscores.fmri → .sma→ .nf → .smoothnf
→ .roimean (averaged BOLD signal in the ROI) → .bgmean (averaged BOLD signal in the background slice) → .method

Where the subfield method contains information about the ROI size (.roisize), the background mask (.bgmask) and ROI mask (.roimask).

More details about signal

On October 15, 2013, Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer announced the signing of an open data policy executive order in conjunction with his compelling talk at the 2013 Code for America Summit. In nonchalant cadence, the mayor announced his support for complete information disclosure by declaring, "It's data, man."Sunlight Foundation - New Louisville Open Data Policy Insists Open By Default is the Future Open Data Annual ReportsSection 5.A. Within one year of the effective Data of this Executive Order, and thereafter no later than September 1 of each year, the Open Data Management Team shall submit to the Mayor an annual Open Data Report.The Open Data Management team (also known as the Data Governance Team is currently led by the city's Data Officer Andrew McKinney in the Office of Civic Innovation and Technology. Previously (2014-16) it was led by the Director of IT.Full Executive OrderEXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 1, SERIES 2013AN EXECUTIVE ORDERCREATING AN OPEN DATA PLAN. WHEREAS, Metro Government is the catalyst for creating a world-class city that provides its citizens with safe and vibrant neighborhoods, great jobs, a strong system of education and innovation, and a high quality of life; andWHEREAS, it should be easy to do business with Metro Government. Online government interactions mean more convenient services for citizens and businesses and online government interactions improve the cost effectiveness and accuracy of government operations; andWHEREAS, an open government also makes certain that every aspect of the built environment also has reliable digital descriptions available to citizens and entrepreneurs for deep engagement mediated by smart devices; andWHEREAS, every citizen has the right to prompt, efficient service from Metro Government; andWHEREAS, the adoption of open standards improves transparency, access to public information and improved coordination and efficiencies among Departments and partner organizations across the public, nonprofit and private sectors; andWHEREAS, by publishing structured standardized data in machine readable formats the Louisville Metro Government seeks to encourage the local software community to develop software applications and tools to collect, organize, and share public record data in new and innovative ways; andWHEREAS, in commitment to the spirit of Open Government, Louisville Metro Government will consider public information to be open by default and will proactively publish data and data containing information, consistent with the Kentucky Open Meetings and Open Records Act; andNOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROMULGATED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER OF THE HONORABLE GREG FISCHER, MAYOR OF LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT AS FOLLOWS:Section 1. Definitions. As used in this Executive Order, the terms below shall have the following definitions:(A) “Open Data” means any public record as defined by the Kentucky Open Records Act, which could be made available online using Open Format data, as well as best practice Open Data structures and formats when possible. Open Data is not information that is treated exempt under KRS 61.878 by Metro Government.(B) “Open Data Report” is the annual report of the Open Data Management Team, which shall (i) summarize and comment on the state of Open Data availability in Metro Government Departments from the previous year; (ii) provide a plan for the next year to improve online public access to Open Data and maintain data quality. The Open Data Management Team shall present an initial Open Data Report to the Mayor within 180 days of this Executive Order.(C) “Open Format” is any widely accepted, nonproprietary, platform-independent, machine-readable method for formatting data, which permits automated processing of such data and is accessible to external search capabilities.(D) “Open Data Portal” means the Internet site established and maintained by or on behalf of Metro Government, located at portal.louisvilleky.gov/service/data or its successor website.(E) “Open Data Management Team” means a group consisting of representatives from each Department within Metro Government and chaired by the Chief Information Officer (CIO) that is responsible for coordinating implementation of an Open Data Policy and creating the Open Data Report.(F) “Department” means any Metro Government department, office, administrative unit, commission, board, advisory committee, or other division of Metro Government within the official jurisdiction of the executive branch.Section 2. Open Data Portal.(A) The Open Data Portal shall serve as the authoritative source for Open Data provided by Metro Government(B) Any Open Data made accessible on Metro Government’s Open Data Portal shall use an Open Format.Section 3. Open Data Management Team.(A) The Chief Information Officer (CIO) of Louisville Metro Government will work with the head of each Department to identify a Data Coordinator in each Department. Data Coordinators will serve as members of an Open Data Management Team facilitated by the CIO and Metro Technology Services. The Open Data Management Team will work to establish a robust, nationally recognized, platform that addresses digital infrastructure and Open Data.(B) The Open Data Management Team will develop an Open Data management policy that will adopt prevailing Open Format standards for Open Data, and develop agreements with regional partners to publish and maintain Open Data that is open and freely available while respecting exemptions allowed by the Kentucky Open Records Act or other federal or state law.Section 4. Department Open Data Catalogue.(A) Each Department shall be responsible for creating an Open Data catalogue, which will include comprehensive inventories of information possessed and/or managed by the Department.(B) Each Department’s Open Data catalogue will classify information holdings as currently “public” or “not yet public”; Departments will work with Metro Technology Services to develop strategies and timelines for publishing open data containing information in a way that is complete, reliable, and has a high level of detail.Section 5. Open Data Report and Policy Review.(A) Within one year of the effective date of this Executive Order, and thereafter no later than September 1 of each year, the Open Data Management Team shall submit to the Mayor an annual Open Data Report.(B) In acknowledgment that technology changes rapidly, in the future, the Open Data Policy should be reviewed and considered for revisions or additions that will continue to position Metro Government as a leader on issues of openness, efficiency, and technical best practices.Section 6. This Executive Order shall take effect as of October 11, 2013.Signed this 11th day of October, 2013, by Greg Fischer, Mayor of Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government.GREG FISCHER, MAYOR