In recent years, with the trend of open science, there have been many efforts to share research data on the internet. To promote research data sharing, data curation is essential to make the data interpretable and reusable. In research fields such as life sciences, earth sciences, and social sciences, tasks and procedures have been already developed to implement efficient data curation to meet the needs and customs of individual research fields. However, not only data sharing within research fields but also interdisciplinary data sharing is required to promote open science. For this purpose, knowledge of data curation across the research fields is surveyed, analyzed, and organized as an ontology in this paper. As the survey, existing vocabularies and procedures are collected and compared as well as interviews with the data curators in research institutes in different fields are conducted to clarify commonalities and differences in data curation across the research fields. It turned out that the granularity of tasks and procedures that constitute the building blocks of data curation is not formalized. Without a method to overcome this gap, it will be challenging to promote interdisciplinary reuse of research data. Based on the analysis above, the ontology for the data curation process is proposed to describe data curation processes in different fields universally. It is described by OWL and shown as valid and consistent from the logical viewpoint. The ontology successfully represents data curation activities as the processes in the different fields acquired by the interviews. It is also helpful to identify the functions of the systems to support the data curation process. This study contributes to building a knowledge framework for an interdisciplinary understanding of data curation activities in different fields.

Here, we make available the supplemental material regarding data collection from the publicaiton "Research Data Curation in Visualization : Position Paper". The dataset represents an aggregated collection of the data policies of selected publication venues in the areas of visualization, computer graphics, software, HCI, and Virtual Reality with inclusions from multimedia, collaboration, and network visualization, for the years 2021-2022. Based on a derived index, long-term preservation and data sharing are evaluated for each venue. The index ranges from No policy to Required sharing and preservation. Additionally the verbatim statements (or the lack thereof) used to reach the concluded score are also provided. Abstract: Research data curation is the act of carefully preparing research data and artifacts for sharing and long-term preservation. Research data management is centrally implemented and formally defined in a data management plan to enable data curation. In tandem, data curation and management facilitate research repeatability. In contrast to other research fields, data curation and management in visualization are not yet part of the researcher’s compendium. In this position paper, we discuss the unique challenges visualization faces and propose how data curation can be practically realized. We share eight lessons learned in managing data in two large research consortia, outline the larger curation workflow, and define the typical roles. We complement our lessons with minimum criteria for selecting a suitable data repository and five challenging scenarios that occur in practice. We conclude with a vision of how the visualization research community can pave the way for new curation standards. Data collection methodology and sources are also described inside the Excel (.xlsx) data file.

The aim of the Data Rescue & Curation Best Practices Guide is to provide an accessible and hands-on approach to handling data rescue and digital curation of at-risk data for use in secondary research. We provide a set of examples and workflows for addressing common challenges with social science survey data that can be applied to other social and behavioural research data. The goal of this guide and set of workflows presented is to improve librarians’ and data curators’ skills in providing access to high-quality, well-documented, and reusable research data. The aspects of data curation that are addressed throughout this guide are adopted from long-standing data library and archiving practices, including: documenting data using standard metadata, file and data organization; using open and software-agnostic formats; and curating research data for reuse.

The purpose of the research study was to explore stakeholders’ opinions on select data management and curation services issues that currently affect all disciplines. A data management and curation services 10-questions survey questionnaire was developed and administered to select data management and curation promoters (funders), stakeholders (institutions), and users (evaluators) from November 5, 2012 to December 5, 2012. The survey was approved by the Florida State University Institutional Review Board (IRB) and assigned the HSC No. 2012.9198 on November 2, 2012. The survey was started by 64 participants, completed by 53, and garnered an 83% completion rate. The survey’s findings from the data management and curation key concepts category lead to the development of the data management and curation (DMC) framework.

This dataset includes information on quality control and data management of researchers and data curators from a social science organization. Four data curators and 24 researchers provided responses for the study. Data collection techniques, data processing strategies, data storage and preservation, metadata standards, data sharing procedures, and the perceived significance of quality control and data quality assurance are the main areas of focus. The dataset attempts to provide insight on the RDM procedures that are being used by a social science organization as well as the difficulties that researchers and data curators encounter in upholding high standards of data quality. The goal of the study is to encourage more investigations aimed at enhancing scientific community data management practices and guidelines.

Chuck Humphrey presents an overview of Research Data Management Infrastructure, including drivers to preserve research data, establishing a national data management strategy, and providing access to publicly funded data.

In recent years, with the trend of open science, there have been many efforts to share research data on the internet. To promote research data sharing, data curation is essential to make the data interpretable and reusable. In research fields such as life sciences, earth sciences, and social sciences, tasks and procedures have been already developed to implement efficient data curation to meet the needs and customs of individual research fields. However, not only data sharing within research fields but also interdisciplinary data sharing is required to promote open science. For this purpose, knowledge of data curation across the research fields is surveyed, analyzed, and organized as an ontology in this paper. As the survey, existing vocabularies and procedures are collected and compared as well as interviews with the data curators in research institutes in different fields are conducted to clarify commonalities and differences in data curation across the research fields. It turned out that the granularity of tasks and procedures that constitute the building blocks of data curation is not formalized. Without a method to overcome this gap, it will be challenging to promote interdisciplinary reuse of research data. Based on the analysis above, the ontology for the data curation process is proposed to describe data curation processes in different fields universally. It is described by OWL and shown as valid and consistent from the logical viewpoint. The ontology successfully represents data curation activities as the processes in the different fields acquired by the interviews. It is also helpful to identify the functions of the systems to support the data curation process. This study contributes to building a knowledge framework for an interdisciplinary understanding of data curation activities in different fields.

This data set presents the results of research conducted at the University of Dodoma, Tanzania. The purpose of the research was to identify and report on relevant RDM services that need to be implemented so that researchers and university management could collaborate and make our research data accessible to the international community. The data set was used to support both the mini-dissertation as well as a paper published in the Data Science Journal. The journal paper presents findings on important issues for consideration when planning to develop and implement RDM services at a developing country, academic institution. The paper also mentions the requirements for the sustainability of these initiatives.

Infrastructures and platforms: data curation in the digital humanities

This researcher-centered Primer was collaboratively authored by over 30 Digital Humanities researchers, research assistants and data professionals. It serves as an overview of the different aspects of data curation and management best practices for the Digital Humanities. The files deposited here - both the English and French version - are drafts.

The purpose of the online survey on data curation was to arrive at a better understanding of the process of creating, organizing, and maintaining data(sets) by organizations in the field of grey literature. The survey population was based on the number of respondents to the earlier questionnaire on Data Retention Status, which was the first phase in the study on global information repository research for STI development. The ten-question online survey was constructed and implemented via SurveyMonkey. Nine of the questions required closed-ended checkbox responses, while the tenth was open-ended. The closed-ended part of the questionnaire dealt with such issues as the strengths and tasks of the organization related to data curation, improving the user experience, collaboration on data sharing, and the introduction of AI technology in the work environment. The results of the survey remain compiled and preserved in SurveyMonkey as well as in DANS, Data Station for the Social Sciences and Humanities.

This is the final dataset resulting from the data steward Career Tracks survey that the Reseach Data Alliance (RDA) Interest Group Professionalising Data Stewardship carried out in 2022. Data stewards were defined as professionals who aim at guaranteeing that data is appropriately treated in all stages of the research cycle (i.e., design, collection, processing, analysis, preservation, data sharing and reuse); we invited responses from participants who either now or in the past carried out data stewardship functions, regardless of their job title. The survey asked respondents about their job titles, the organizational context in which they work(ed) including contract types and domains, their educational background, and how they perceive their professional future.

This dataset publication includes:

1. Survey response data in CSV format. The file includes data from 241 respondents who consented to participate in the survey and share the data via a repsoitory, who indicated that they either currently work or have worked in the past in a data stewardship role, and who responded to at least one further question.
2. Thematic analysis of the qualitative questions Q11 and Q12 in PDF format.

Data curation and data deposit workflows for the University of Guelph Research Data Repositories. These documents describe the internal workflows for the University of Guelph library's data repository service. Please note that these are dynamic documents and are updated as required.

Data for Post-retraction citation: A review of scholarly research on the spread of retracted science Schneider, Jodi; Das, Susmita; Léveillé, Jacqueline; Proescholdt, Randi Contact: Jodi Schneider jodi@illinois.edu & jschneider@pobox.com ********** OVERVIEW ********** This dataset provides further analysis for an ongoing literature review about post-retraction citation. This ongoing work extends a poster presented as: Jodi Schneider, Jacqueline Léveillé, Randi Proescholdt, Susmita Das, and The RISRS Team. Characterization of Publications on Post-Retraction Citation of Retracted Articles. Presented at the Ninth International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication, September 8-10, 2022 hybrid in Chicago. https://hdl.handle.net/2142/114477 (now also in https://peerreviewcongress.org/abstract/characterization-of-publications-on-post-retraction-citation-of-retracted-articles/ ) Items as of the poster version are listed in the bibliography 92-PRC-items.pdf. Note that following the poster, we made several changes to the dataset (see changes-since-PRC-poster.txt). For both the poster dataset and the current dataset, 5 items have 2 categories (see 5-items-have-2-categories.txt). Articles were selected from the Empirical Retraction Lit bibliography (https://infoqualitylab.org/projects/risrs2020/bibliography/ and https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5498474 ). The current dataset includes 92 items; 91 items were selected from the 386 total items in Empirical Retraction Lit bibliography version v.2.15.0 (July 2021); 1 item was added because it is the final form publication of a grouping of 2 items from the bibliography: Yang (2022) Do retraction practices work effectively? Evidence from citations of psychological retracted articles http://doi.org/10.1177/01655515221097623 Items were classified into 7 topics; 2 of the 7 topics have been analyzed to date. ********************** OVERVIEW OF ANALYSIS ********************** DATA ANALYZED: 2 of the 7 topics have been analyzed to date: field-based case studies (n = 20) author-focused case studies of 1 or several authors with many retracted publications (n = 15) FUTURE DATA TO BE ANALYZED, NOT YET COVERED: 5 of the 7 topics have not yet been analyzed as of this release: database-focused analyses (n = 33) paper-focused case studies of 1 to 125 selected papers (n = 15) studies of retracted publications cited in review literature (n = 8) geographic case studies (n = 4) studies selecting retracted publications by method (n = 2) ************** FILE LISTING ************** ------------------ BIBLIOGRAPHY ------------------ 92-PRC-items.pdf ------------------ TEXT FILES ------------------ README.txt 5-items-have-2-categories.txt changes-since-PRC-poster.txt ------------------ CODEBOOKS ------------------ Codebook for authors.docx Codebook for authors.pdf Codebook for field.docx Codebook for field.pdf Codebook for KEY.docx Codebook for KEY.pdf ------------------ SPREADSHEETS ------------------ field.csv field.xlsx multipleauthors.csv multipleauthors.xlsx multipleauthors-not-named.csv multipleauthors-not-named.xlsx singleauthors.csv singleauthors.xlsx *************************** DESCRIPTION OF FILE TYPES *************************** BIBLIOGRAPHY (92-PRC-items.pdf) presents the items, as of the poster version. This has minor differences from the current data set. Consult changes-since-PRC-poster.txt for details on the differences. TEXT FILES provide notes for additional context. These files end in .txt. CODEBOOKS describe the data we collected. The same data is provided in both Word (.docx) and PDF format. There is one general codebook that is referred to in the other codebooks: Codebook for KEY lists fields assigned (e.g., for a journal or conference). Note that this is distinct from the overall analysis in the Empirical Retraction Lit bibliography of fields analyzed; for that analysis see Proescholdt, Randi (2021): RISRS Retraction Review - Field Variation Data. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. https://doi.org/10.13012/B2IDB-2070560_V1 Other codebooks document specific information we entered on each column of a spreadsheet. SPREADSHEETS present the data collected. The same data is provided in both Excel (.xlsx) and CSV format. Each data row describes a publication or item (e.g., thesis, poster, preprint). For column header explainations, see the associated codebook. ***************************** DETAILS ON THE SPREADSHEETS ***************************** field-based case studies CODEBOOK: Codebook for field --REFERS TO: Codebook for KEY DATA SHEET: field REFERS TO: Codebook for KEY --NUMBER OF DATA ROWS: 20 NOTE: Each data row describes a publication/item. --NUMBER OF PUBLICATION GROUPINGS: 17 --GROUPED PUBLICATIONS: Rubbo (2019) - 2 items, Yang (2022) - 3 items author-focused case studies of 1 or several authors with many retracted publications CODEBOOK: Codebook for authors --REFERS TO: Codebook for KEY DATA SHEET 1: singleauthors (n = 9) --NUMBER OF DATA ROWS: 9 --NUMBER OF PUBLICATION GROUPINGS: 9 DATA SHEET 2: multipleauthors (n = 5 --NUMBER OF DATA ROWS: 5 --NUMBER OF PUBLICATION GROUPINGS: 5 DATA SHEET 3: multipleauthors-not-named (n = 1) --NUMBER OF DATA ROWS: 1 --NUMBER OF PUBLICATION GROUPINGS: 1 ********************************* CRediT http://credit.niso.org ********************************* Susmita Das: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology Jaqueline Léveillé: Data curation, Investigation Randi Proescholdt: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology Jodi Schneider: Conceptualization, Data curation, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision

This GitHub repository contains a downloadable snapshot of National Institute of Standards and Technology's COVID-19 Data Repository, curated from the COVID-19 Open Research Dataset (CORD-19) provided by the Allen Institute for AI. Curated Archive for Covid-19 Research Challenge Dataset- The COVID-19 Data Repository provides searchable CORD-19 data and metadata, including full-text extracted from the original CORD-19 JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) files. It is built using the Configurable Data Curation System (CDCS) developed at NIST.

This dataset contains raw data and processed data from the survey "Praksis og behov i forskningsdatakuratering i Norge" ('Practice and needs in research data curation in Norway'), carried out in fall 2022 as part of the project "Kuratornettverk for FAIR forskningsdata" ('Curation Network for FAIR Resarch Data'), which aimed at establishing a national curation network across research organizations in Norway. The main goal of the survey was to map practices and needs related to research data curation in Norway. The results from the survey were used as input and basis for the project group to decide on how the planned national curation network should be organized and what services it should provide. The main target group for participating in the survey were people who work with research data curation or who will have this as (one of) their future tasks in their work at Norwegian research organizations. There were 57 responses submitted to the survey. Three of the respondents did not consent to their responses being openly published. These responses are not included in this dataset. The data in this dataset thus contain 54 responses. The survey results are presented in a survey report (Conzett, 2025).

Data relating to the publication. Sharing research data and scholarship is of national importance because of the increased focus on maximizing return on the U.S. government's investment in research programs. Recent government policy changes have directly affected the management and accessibility of publically funded research. On January 18, 2011, the National Science Foundation, a U.S. agency that supports research and education in nonmedical fields, required that data management plans be submitted with all grant proposals. On February 22, 2013, the U.S. President's Office of Science and Technology Policy extended a similar requirement for all federal agencies with research and development budgets of more than $100 million. These requirements illustrate the need for further coordination and management of data as scholarship with traditional publications. Purdue University Libraries and its Joint Transportation Research Program (JTRP) collaborated to develop a comprehensive work flow that links technical report production with the management and publication of associated data. This paper illustrates early initiatives to integrate discrete data publications with traditional scholarly publications by leveraging new and existing repository platforms and services. The authors review government policies, past data-sharing practices, early pilot initiatives, and work flow integration between Purdue's data repository, the traditional press, and institutional repository. Through the adoption of these work flows, the authors propose best practices for integrating data publishing and dissemination into the research process. The implementation of this model has the potential to assist researchers in meeting the requirements of federal funding agencies, while reducing redundancy, ensuring integrity, expanding accessibility, and increasing the return on research investment.

In recent years, with the trend of open science, there have been many efforts to share research data on the internet. To promote research data sharing, data curation is essential to make the data interpretable and reusable. In research fields such as life sciences, earth sciences, and social sciences, tasks and procedures have been already developed to implement efficient data curation to meet the needs and customs of individual research fields. However, not only data sharing within research fields but also interdisciplinary data sharing is required to promote open science. For this purpose, knowledge of data curation across the research fields is surveyed, analyzed, and organized as an ontology in this paper. As the survey, existing vocabularies and procedures are collected and compared as well as interviews with the data curators in research institutes in different fields are conducted to clarify commonalities and differences in data curation across the research fields. It turned out that the granularity of tasks and procedures that constitute the building blocks of data curation is not formalized. Without a method to overcome this gap, it will be challenging to promote interdisciplinary reuse of research data. Based on the analysis above, the ontology for the data curation process is proposed to describe data curation processes in different fields universally. It is described by OWL and shown as valid and consistent from the logical viewpoint. The ontology successfully represents data curation activities as the processes in the different fields acquired by the interviews. It is also helpful to identify the functions of the systems to support the data curation process. This study contributes to building a knowledge framework for an interdisciplinary understanding of data curation activities in different fields.

No description was included in this Dataset collected from the OSF

Revisiting Automatic Data Curation for Vision Foundation Models in Digital Pathology

Abstract Vision foundation models (FMs) are accelerating the devel- opment of digital pathology algorithms and transforming biomedical research. These models learn, in a self-supervised manner, to represent histological features in highly heterogeneous tiles extracted from whole-slide images (WSIs) of real-world patient samples. The performance of these FMs is significantly influenced by the size… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/swiss-ai/patho-ssl-data-curation.