Cadmore media player playing video Metadata Greatest Hits: Music thru the Ages! Recording
Video Player
Accessibility
Using forms mode, you can utilize keyboard shortcuts to make usability more efficient.
Space bar will play and pause the video. Pressing escape will close all displays and pressing it again will jump to the end of the player.
You can press A to open the Keyboard Shortcut Dialog which also provides an audio description of the player and all of its features.
Language
1x
Play Speed
Adjust Volume
Transcript
Search
Result Count
of
Click to jump to result
Search
Re-center
Segments
Result Count
of
Click to jump to result
Search
Name:
Metadata Greatest Hits: Music thru the Ages! Recording
Description:
Metadata Greatest Hits: Music thru the Ages! Recording
Thumbnail URL:
https://cadmoremediastorage.blob.core.windows.net/140884e4-6f20-46a4-97e3-15a03448f1a2/videoscrubberimages/Scrubber_3.jpg
Duration:
T00H31M44S
Embed URL:
https://stream.cadmore.media/player/140884e4-6f20-46a4-97e3-15a03448f1a2
Content URL:
https://cadmoreoriginalmedia.blob.core.windows.net/140884e4-6f20-46a4-97e3-15a03448f1a2/Metadata Greatest Hits Music thru the Ages-NISO Plus.mp4?sv=2019-02-02&sr=c&sig=zk06l0%2BBvFx85SEdIPIYEcb8O8gHD86B97nIv6HyDDw%3D&st=2024-12-22T03%3A50%3A57Z&se=2024-12-22T05%3A55%3A57Z&sp=r
Upload Date:
2024-03-06T00:00:00.0000000
Transcript:
Language: EN.
Segment:0 .
The following is a paid advertisement for Wine Life's Music Collection. Hey, I'm Johnny C. I used to be in the Aptarians, but now I got Johnny C's Rock and Roll Paradise Jand shilling old music to people like you!
OHHey, we all got to make a living, right? We got a cool drive in, a cool car, and a cool guy like me! Now, all we need is some rock and roll --songs like Granularity! I love Metadata and who can forget? Every Author has its ORCID. Talk about so many old goodies! But, you know, it was way back in 1958 when a Los Angeles DJ coined the term "oldies but goodies." He had a great idea.
Why not put all the rock and roll records teenagers love into one LP? That was the very first "oldies but goodies" album, and it made rock and roll history. That first oldies n goodies album went on to sell millions. I still got my copy, except my buddy Vinny put a scratch on side 2! But I'm not worried about it, because the same collection is now available in a two disk CD collection.
More titles even! Now, Go back to the golden age of metadata as we present the biggest, best and coolest collection of metadata titles ever! Wine Life presents the ultimate collection of metadata titles! All smiles, I know what it takes to submit this thing. I'll be at it to the sun goes down, and all through the night time. Oh, yeah, Oh Yeah.
I'll type what you want to hear, reformat things till I shed a tear-- it's never the right size! Oh, Yeah. I put my ORCID in to show you just who I am. I put my ROR in, I'll show you where I am. I'm now findable. I'm much more than just a name. I'm accessible. You can find me all the same.
I'm reusable. You don't have licenses to pay. I'm so confident. Yeah, I'm interoperable today. I'm findable today. Accessible today. Interoperable today. I'm reusable today. Thank you.
Hi, everyone. My name is Ginny Herbert. I'm an editorial development manager at Frontiers. As you might already know, Frontiers' US team has been rapidly expanding, and many new Frontiers join us after a career in research. So I was talking with one of our new team members recently and he started his role after finishing his PhD and he said, Ginny, can you just help me understand why people even publish in journals? Like now that we have the internet, why don't people just post their PDFS online?
As someone who has grown up in publishing, this question was really like throwing some cold water on my face. It was so eye-opening. For me, It really highlighted that So often we assume that researchers are knowledgeable about scholarly communication, but that's not always the case. There are a lot of incredibly smart, well-published people who don't even really know the basics of scholarly communication, much less about anything as specific as metadata.
And it's not for lack of trying, right? Librarians consistently report that they run educational workshops on these things, and I see publishers advertising webinars on these topics on LinkedIn constantly. So the resources exist, but there's still this fundamental knowledge gap between scholarly communication professionals and researchers. So let's back up a step and just think about why people even become researchers.
Pew did a survey of scientists associated with AAAS in 2014. And you can see here the breakdown of why people pursue research careers. The top answer is intellectual challenge, lifelong curiosity and a love of science or nature. So scientists become scientists because they are pumped about science. This is really intuitive, right? Those of us who talk with researchers a lot know that when you talk with researchers, the thing they want to talk about most is their research.
And it makes sense, because they've selected a job that allows them to hyperfocus on one subject that they are extraordinarily interested in. Now, when we think about why people go into scholarly communication, I think the reasoning is probably really similar, interest in the subject matter. From what I could find, there's not really data available on why people pursue scholarly communication careers.
But anecdotally, I think a lot of us love scholarly communication, because we care about enabling research by helping people find information efficiently and disseminate it as widely as possible. So what we have here are two groups of people, researchers and scholarly communication folks, working on the same things, but from different perspectives and often at different points in the research lifecycle. And what can happen is that, because we're working on the same things, when we have conversations, we just assume that we're talking about the same things.
But researchers often have very different priorities and interests than we do, and we can end up speaking past each other. This paper analyzes COVID 19 genomic metadata. The authors analyzed the metadata for COVID 19 viral genomes and found that around 10% of the metadata had misspellings, inconsistencies or ambiguities.
Now to us, this reiterates a big problem. We need high-quality metadata, and clearly that's still lacking. But this was also, as the authors describe, one of "the most extensive and expeditious genomic sequencing efforts in history." And I bet if you spoke with the researchers who sequenced the viral genomes, they would be far more interested in that latter point than the inconsistencies and errors in the metadata that were pointed out in this paper.
So the question is, when we're talking about something as hyper-specific as metadata to people who primarily care about their research, how do we keep them engaged in the conversation? In the context of metadata, I think the answer is centering something that both researchers and scholarly communication folks care about discoverability and impact. We know that one of the reasons metadata is so important is because of how it impacts discoverability.
And discoverability is something that matters a lot to researchers too. We can also see that in data on outlet choice. In Ithaca, S+R's most recent faculty survey, we see that, besides disciplinary alignment, researchers prioritize the readership of a journal and that journal's Impact Factor above all other characteristics. Something that those of us who are interested in scholarly communication know is that there's actually a ton that goes into how many people read your work and cite it beyond where you publish, including as I'm sure I don't need to tell the people here, the quality of the metadata.
And I think that if we told researchers that we have suggestions for making their work more findable, and citable by others in their field, they would be extremely interested in conversations about metadata and it Wouldn't just be this footnote to their "actual" work. So when we're talking with researchers and providing workshops, let's be sure that we're meeting them where they are and centering what we both care about, making their work as discoverable and impactful as possible.
An example of this would be that when we're teaching people about the FAIR principles, instead of hosting workshops on understanding FAIR, perhaps we could shift to hosting sessions on how to ensure the data set you've invested a ton of time and money into creating is maximally impactful and useful to your field and that you are actually rewarded for those efforts.
So, getting back to how I started my presentation the question from my colleague about why people even publish in journals. As I'm sure you can imagine, I did not have a very succinct answer for him. We ended up talking about it over multiple virtual coffees, and afterwards I was reflecting on what that means for communicating with people externally. As a publisher, if it takes multiple hour-long conversations to adequately explain our value, then what does that mean for how we explain it to researchers?
I think the answer to that is that we don't really need to tell them that much, and they probably don't care to know that much information. What they do need to know is what's going on behind the scenes enough, so that they can make decisions about publicising their work in a way that maximizes the impact of it. And we need to ensure that when we're telling them about this, we're framing it in a way that interests them so we're all participating in the same conversation.
What classics? I will never be able to get Interoperable out of my head! I bet you can't either. But don't worry, we have a lot more classics for you as well. Who can forget these great songs? I have this thing I come upon when I do online research, my expectations turn to doom.
License confusion stops me in my tracks. Like always getting stuck on mute in Zoom. No content access through my own devices. They come with prices and vices. I end up being crisis (tale as old as time) I wake up screaming from dreaming, one day I'll end this grieving over article retrieving for the last time. Are they CC-BY or even NC-ND and it's clear if the metadata agrees, I'll stare and stare, but it just never becomes any clearer.
It must be exhausting. Always searching for the CC-0. Hello, everyone. I'm Ana Heredia. I'm talking from Brazil, Rio de Janeiro. I'm delighted to be part of this fun exercise of trying to engage researchers around the importance of persistent identifiers for research information.
So here I'm talking to researchers who don't know much about persistent identifers and related metadata and that are not necessarily seeing the benefits of their use for accessing and sharing accurate and complete research information. So what are Persistent identifiers or PIDs according to Wikipedia Persistent Identifiers are a long lasting reference to a document or a file, a web page or other object.
Typically, such an identifier is not only persistent, but actionable. You can plug it into a web browser and be taken to the identified source. In research, persistent identifiers are key elements of the research information digital infrastructure. They enable trustworthy connections between research information pieces and allow for a better management and a better understanding of the research system as a whole.
PIDs are persistent identifiers for people, for places and things in the research ecosystem, PIDs to disambiguate, PIDs to link, and they can be broadly grouped into three main types PIDs for researchers and collaborators, PIDs for research organizations and funders, and PIDs for research outputs, research objects, data sets such as such as the DOI and other persistent identifiers.
PIDs are to be embedded in everything that you do Articles, data, DMPs, grants, reviews, preprints, projects, resources, physical samples, instruments, everything. Many organizations globally adopt PIDs in their workflows research organizations, funders, and publishers typically, because they help streamline processes and guarantee assertion, creating a system with information that has a clear and trustworthy provenance and that can be easily and effectively shared. PIDs may be open, meaning that they are fully interoperable in any system like those provided by Crossref.
DataCite, ORCID, and others. Or they can be proprietary, meaning that they are to be used within a single organization, such as Clarivate's Researcher ID or Elsevier's Scopus ID. PIDs can make research FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable), and thus make research information discoverable and citable. interconnected and interoperable. PIDs and their associated metadata are critical enablers for research and scholarship and have capabilities that support the aims of open research PIDs are key for the visibility and citability of your work.
Persistent identifiers are not only important to uniquely identify a publication, a dataset or a person. The metadata related to these persistent identifiers can provide unambiguous linking between persistent identifiers at the same type. For example, journal articles citing other journal articles or of different types For example, linking a researcher and the data sets they produced.
For example, if the metadata of a digital object like an article or a data set contains the page of a related object, it is possible to establish a connection and retrieve additional information about the related object. Connecting everything reveals the true power of PIDs, and the benefits of PIDs can be amplified by connecting them via their metadata. Connecting open metadata helps researchers with discovery, improved workflows, global collaborations, analytics, and identifying knowledge.
Persistent identifiers and metadata are central for visibility and citability in the digital ecosystem. PIDs can be used to visualize a researcher's network in a graph of collaboration. To establish the graph, the metadata of the researcher's papers are scanned for PIDs of co-authors and based on these PIDs, connections are drawn and the network is created.
Work is still needed to connect existing persistent identifiers to each other in standardized ways, for example, to the outputs associated with a particular researcher, repository, institutional funder, for discovery and impact assessment. But connecting people, places, and things relies on community-driven, open identifiers and metadata, so it is a collective effort. I'll leave you with a funny story about PIDapalooza, a festival created collectively by 4 nonprofit organizations to discuss about persistent identifiers.
John Chodacki from the University of California shared it with us. Well, we started PIDapalooza because we wanted to have a conference about persistent identifiers that wasn't boring and super dry. And so we talked about how we should make an entire conference about PIDs and make it really outstandingly fun. Hence, PIDapalooza.
So basically the story has to do with those organizing a conference that was totally Rock and Roll. When we were thinking about what fun things we could do on the persistence theme, we thought of the Bangles' song Eternal Flame, so we bought one online. But the legend was really born because we brought it from the US to Iceland, and we plugged it in onstage.
Didn't realize the interoperability issues there! It's short cutted and actually caught on fire. A cautionary tale about sustainability and risk management here. But we bought a new one for the next PIDapalooza and figured out how to handle different countries' outlets. And each year we would have storytelling of it, and have the plugin in ceremony and the passing of the torch ceremony.
So, it kind of became part of the folklore. Thanks to John for this piece of history increasing the awareness of the usefulness and the importance of PIDs. And increasing their widest use as possible within the broad research community remains the most important task to achieve. Thank you very much. Wow those hits just keep coming. Kind of like being in a Rocky movie-- up against the ropes and begging for the bell to ring!
But wait, there's more. Who can forget these classics? Hi, everyone. I'm Margie Hlava. And I'm Heather Kotulla. We're both from Access Innovations, and we'd like to give a special thanks to Sam Barrett behind us on the cello.
Marriage debate has been around since books began collecting. Classification came first and then came cataloging. You can add the CIA and Civil War kids and up. These will do. And don't forget. But do not submit the ideas this content to consider that we think has built up new bearings so that data rates research and navigation taxonomy for website so college thinking there the data here to stay.
We can not search without useful text for hidden strings tax one three retrieval. There's more to metadata than IDs and codes. So let's explain the span, the repertoire. There's subject metadata, which includes things like thestory, taxonomies, ontologies, authority lists apply to the content. There's credit which goes over author roles and their individual contributions and many, many others.
That data, it's about your data. It is core to what we do. There are many kinds to make the references. Standards for conformity for all. I says an ISBN and we have an organic to deal in the credit and a multitude of others.
For you the ANSI is create these numbers. They seem to multiply by 9. There is and of course an ISO and then the bisect to ensure the code is right. Associations make codes for numbers that apply to industry.
You can't avoid them. They work together in ensuring that Congress will to have somebody that records and contact us, especially if we do not know. We need guidance for navigation to tell us exactly how to search and where to go.
Well, of course there is a center. Well, in fact, there's really 3339.19 and the w3c. We are in for getting ISO 25 964. It's so hard to sing along when the syllables in the center count up to more than four.
They support our searches and navigation by applying words as code. You tag the car, you turn them into searches so users can find what their subject matter. Data is not a code said. It is a term set for content retrievals from the information.
See when you apply your method data, do not forget to select returns taxonomies for navigation ontologies knowledge maps are the sorry will do you are my data my matter data you are you so many ways you'll never see it, but we sure need and please use subject matter data everyday together.
All these different pieces of metadata give a complete picture for which we are very thankful. They seem pissed. Sweeney the identity that writer and author. Like me, I once was a novice.
But now I am unique. Once I know. But now I have a meeting once more. And that is sorry. My kid died and credits my obscurity. Really, I hope relishes doing that work in the down year the hour first be leaving.
The register has problems on utility to me. They're my ID circulars. They will my identity and file be as long as research in New York.
When we need them, they're publishing all the papers we need. And we still need paper. We have, you know, we know what to say to deadlines. Then when we first.
You think. Thank you for listening to this wonderful session at nice. Plus, I know what you're thinking. I can get all these songs in one set of CDS. Please tell me more. How can I get one of these remarkable collections? Well settle down. Settle down.
There's no need to fly around the world. Or maybe even just take a jet ride, like into the metadata zone. Highway to the danger zone right into. Third date is on heading into publication. Author needs identification where they're from, then you must see. Or a University highway to the data zone.
Take your right to. Danger zone. You'll never say Hello to you until your data is identified. You'll never know what you can do to your DTDC is ready to fly. Got a tag? Samantha cleave. Oh, it's where I burn to be. The further on the edge.
The heart of the intensity. Oh, Yeah. Who can forget those old classics? Well, certainly not Kenny Loggins. Where are the authors coming from? Well, hold on, folks. This ride is going to be a thriller. For publishers looking for authors, researchers who want to be starting something.
It's important to have a strong metadata management from the beginning through to publication. So whether you've spent in Bangkok or your authors and reviewers are all coming out of the Eastern regions or Africa, proper metadata capture ensures country of origin and other discounts are properly applied during APC collection and transformative agreement tracking.
Meanwhile, back here in the USA, those folks who come from a land down under and those born in the USA, don't you forget about me or that London is calling. It's not the dire straits you think it is. These authors, researchers shouldn't have to fight for their right to publish while publishers understand that you can't get money for nothing. One way or another, this crucial metadata must be collected early and tagged semantically.
So the final countdown to publish content isn't the end of the world as we know it. Where is the author funding coming from? Well, that's a great question. Let's dance. Understanding the career stage of authors allows more in depth tracking from early researcher to rock star, which can inform list and product development as well as journal development.
Following the funding allows publishers more insight into the creation support of author, subject communities, which in turn gives more opportunity to engage direct with those communities. Following the funding leads to author retention. Today's authors might be tomorrow's reviewers, book, chapter authors or editorial board members, even ICs. Meanwhile, taking data to the universities and publishers and using it to discuss transformative agreements, funders, usage, informed offers is a great way to build relationships.
Everyone involved needs to collect, examine and analyze the data held on subscription holdings and APC payments for the institutions. I want to know what data is. Tools like apter cypress help gather and collate this data for you. Negotiations can't happen if you are not all looking at the same data.
Love and data is a battlefield. Adding hierarchies and other connected data helps institutions see where the subscriptions are coming from and where the publisher's needs will be best met. Dissemination and discoverability. Papa don't preach about hierarchies or data. A full understanding of who authors are and where they are from when coupled with usage data at an institutional level, can give publishers a full 360 degree insight into creation and use.
This information can be used for much more detailed conversations than previously with consortia and individual research institutes on RDP deals. Gathering data is an opportunity to develop a community if large amounts of usage are seen, but no authors. You can use the data to help find those authors. It doesn't all have to be Purple Rain.
Data on funders can be used as an insight for portfolio and subject development. Well, folks, if you're like me, you're probably sitting there thinking it's over. Now we can get to the good part. How can you get this collection for yourself? Well, if you act now, you not only get this great collection and an autographed copy of my best seller, how did I get myself into this?
The Johnny C story. But you also get a free set of Ginsu knives. Just send $1 Plus postage and handling to me. Johnny c, thank you and good listening.
Segment:0 .
The following is a paid advertisement for Wine Life's Music Collection. Hey, I'm Johnny C. I used to be in the Aptarians, but now I got Johnny C's Rock and Roll Paradise Jand shilling old music to people like you!
OHHey, we all got to make a living, right? We got a cool drive in, a cool car, and a cool guy like me! Now, all we need is some rock and roll --songs like Granularity! I love Metadata and who can forget? Every Author has its ORCID. Talk about so many old goodies! But, you know, it was way back in 1958 when a Los Angeles DJ coined the term "oldies but goodies." He had a great idea.
Why not put all the rock and roll records teenagers love into one LP? That was the very first "oldies but goodies" album, and it made rock and roll history. That first oldies n goodies album went on to sell millions. I still got my copy, except my buddy Vinny put a scratch on side 2! But I'm not worried about it, because the same collection is now available in a two disk CD collection.
More titles even! Now, Go back to the golden age of metadata as we present the biggest, best and coolest collection of metadata titles ever! Wine Life presents the ultimate collection of metadata titles! All smiles, I know what it takes to submit this thing. I'll be at it to the sun goes down, and all through the night time. Oh, yeah, Oh Yeah.
I'll type what you want to hear, reformat things till I shed a tear-- it's never the right size! Oh, Yeah. I put my ORCID in to show you just who I am. I put my ROR in, I'll show you where I am. I'm now findable. I'm much more than just a name. I'm accessible. You can find me all the same.
I'm reusable. You don't have licenses to pay. I'm so confident. Yeah, I'm interoperable today. I'm findable today. Accessible today. Interoperable today. I'm reusable today. Thank you.
Hi, everyone. My name is Ginny Herbert. I'm an editorial development manager at Frontiers. As you might already know, Frontiers' US team has been rapidly expanding, and many new Frontiers join us after a career in research. So I was talking with one of our new team members recently and he started his role after finishing his PhD and he said, Ginny, can you just help me understand why people even publish in journals? Like now that we have the internet, why don't people just post their PDFS online?
As someone who has grown up in publishing, this question was really like throwing some cold water on my face. It was so eye-opening. For me, It really highlighted that So often we assume that researchers are knowledgeable about scholarly communication, but that's not always the case. There are a lot of incredibly smart, well-published people who don't even really know the basics of scholarly communication, much less about anything as specific as metadata.
And it's not for lack of trying, right? Librarians consistently report that they run educational workshops on these things, and I see publishers advertising webinars on these topics on LinkedIn constantly. So the resources exist, but there's still this fundamental knowledge gap between scholarly communication professionals and researchers. So let's back up a step and just think about why people even become researchers.
Pew did a survey of scientists associated with AAAS in 2014. And you can see here the breakdown of why people pursue research careers. The top answer is intellectual challenge, lifelong curiosity and a love of science or nature. So scientists become scientists because they are pumped about science. This is really intuitive, right? Those of us who talk with researchers a lot know that when you talk with researchers, the thing they want to talk about most is their research.
And it makes sense, because they've selected a job that allows them to hyperfocus on one subject that they are extraordinarily interested in. Now, when we think about why people go into scholarly communication, I think the reasoning is probably really similar, interest in the subject matter. From what I could find, there's not really data available on why people pursue scholarly communication careers.
But anecdotally, I think a lot of us love scholarly communication, because we care about enabling research by helping people find information efficiently and disseminate it as widely as possible. So what we have here are two groups of people, researchers and scholarly communication folks, working on the same things, but from different perspectives and often at different points in the research lifecycle. And what can happen is that, because we're working on the same things, when we have conversations, we just assume that we're talking about the same things.
But researchers often have very different priorities and interests than we do, and we can end up speaking past each other. This paper analyzes COVID 19 genomic metadata. The authors analyzed the metadata for COVID 19 viral genomes and found that around 10% of the metadata had misspellings, inconsistencies or ambiguities.
Now to us, this reiterates a big problem. We need high-quality metadata, and clearly that's still lacking. But this was also, as the authors describe, one of "the most extensive and expeditious genomic sequencing efforts in history." And I bet if you spoke with the researchers who sequenced the viral genomes, they would be far more interested in that latter point than the inconsistencies and errors in the metadata that were pointed out in this paper.
So the question is, when we're talking about something as hyper-specific as metadata to people who primarily care about their research, how do we keep them engaged in the conversation? In the context of metadata, I think the answer is centering something that both researchers and scholarly communication folks care about discoverability and impact. We know that one of the reasons metadata is so important is because of how it impacts discoverability.
And discoverability is something that matters a lot to researchers too. We can also see that in data on outlet choice. In Ithaca, S+R's most recent faculty survey, we see that, besides disciplinary alignment, researchers prioritize the readership of a journal and that journal's Impact Factor above all other characteristics. Something that those of us who are interested in scholarly communication know is that there's actually a ton that goes into how many people read your work and cite it beyond where you publish, including as I'm sure I don't need to tell the people here, the quality of the metadata.
And I think that if we told researchers that we have suggestions for making their work more findable, and citable by others in their field, they would be extremely interested in conversations about metadata and it Wouldn't just be this footnote to their "actual" work. So when we're talking with researchers and providing workshops, let's be sure that we're meeting them where they are and centering what we both care about, making their work as discoverable and impactful as possible.
An example of this would be that when we're teaching people about the FAIR principles, instead of hosting workshops on understanding FAIR, perhaps we could shift to hosting sessions on how to ensure the data set you've invested a ton of time and money into creating is maximally impactful and useful to your field and that you are actually rewarded for those efforts.
So, getting back to how I started my presentation the question from my colleague about why people even publish in journals. As I'm sure you can imagine, I did not have a very succinct answer for him. We ended up talking about it over multiple virtual coffees, and afterwards I was reflecting on what that means for communicating with people externally. As a publisher, if it takes multiple hour-long conversations to adequately explain our value, then what does that mean for how we explain it to researchers?
I think the answer to that is that we don't really need to tell them that much, and they probably don't care to know that much information. What they do need to know is what's going on behind the scenes enough, so that they can make decisions about publicising their work in a way that maximizes the impact of it. And we need to ensure that when we're telling them about this, we're framing it in a way that interests them so we're all participating in the same conversation.
What classics? I will never be able to get Interoperable out of my head! I bet you can't either. But don't worry, we have a lot more classics for you as well. Who can forget these great songs? I have this thing I come upon when I do online research, my expectations turn to doom.
License confusion stops me in my tracks. Like always getting stuck on mute in Zoom. No content access through my own devices. They come with prices and vices. I end up being crisis (tale as old as time) I wake up screaming from dreaming, one day I'll end this grieving over article retrieving for the last time. Are they CC-BY or even NC-ND and it's clear if the metadata agrees, I'll stare and stare, but it just never becomes any clearer.
It must be exhausting. Always searching for the CC-0. Hello, everyone. I'm Ana Heredia. I'm talking from Brazil, Rio de Janeiro. I'm delighted to be part of this fun exercise of trying to engage researchers around the importance of persistent identifiers for research information.
So here I'm talking to researchers who don't know much about persistent identifers and related metadata and that are not necessarily seeing the benefits of their use for accessing and sharing accurate and complete research information. So what are Persistent identifiers or PIDs according to Wikipedia Persistent Identifiers are a long lasting reference to a document or a file, a web page or other object.
Typically, such an identifier is not only persistent, but actionable. You can plug it into a web browser and be taken to the identified source. In research, persistent identifiers are key elements of the research information digital infrastructure. They enable trustworthy connections between research information pieces and allow for a better management and a better understanding of the research system as a whole.
PIDs are persistent identifiers for people, for places and things in the research ecosystem, PIDs to disambiguate, PIDs to link, and they can be broadly grouped into three main types PIDs for researchers and collaborators, PIDs for research organizations and funders, and PIDs for research outputs, research objects, data sets such as such as the DOI and other persistent identifiers.
PIDs are to be embedded in everything that you do Articles, data, DMPs, grants, reviews, preprints, projects, resources, physical samples, instruments, everything. Many organizations globally adopt PIDs in their workflows research organizations, funders, and publishers typically, because they help streamline processes and guarantee assertion, creating a system with information that has a clear and trustworthy provenance and that can be easily and effectively shared. PIDs may be open, meaning that they are fully interoperable in any system like those provided by Crossref.
DataCite, ORCID, and others. Or they can be proprietary, meaning that they are to be used within a single organization, such as Clarivate's Researcher ID or Elsevier's Scopus ID. PIDs can make research FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable), and thus make research information discoverable and citable. interconnected and interoperable. PIDs and their associated metadata are critical enablers for research and scholarship and have capabilities that support the aims of open research PIDs are key for the visibility and citability of your work.
Persistent identifiers are not only important to uniquely identify a publication, a dataset or a person. The metadata related to these persistent identifiers can provide unambiguous linking between persistent identifiers at the same type. For example, journal articles citing other journal articles or of different types For example, linking a researcher and the data sets they produced.
For example, if the metadata of a digital object like an article or a data set contains the page of a related object, it is possible to establish a connection and retrieve additional information about the related object. Connecting everything reveals the true power of PIDs, and the benefits of PIDs can be amplified by connecting them via their metadata. Connecting open metadata helps researchers with discovery, improved workflows, global collaborations, analytics, and identifying knowledge.
Persistent identifiers and metadata are central for visibility and citability in the digital ecosystem. PIDs can be used to visualize a researcher's network in a graph of collaboration. To establish the graph, the metadata of the researcher's papers are scanned for PIDs of co-authors and based on these PIDs, connections are drawn and the network is created.
Work is still needed to connect existing persistent identifiers to each other in standardized ways, for example, to the outputs associated with a particular researcher, repository, institutional funder, for discovery and impact assessment. But connecting people, places, and things relies on community-driven, open identifiers and metadata, so it is a collective effort. I'll leave you with a funny story about PIDapalooza, a festival created collectively by 4 nonprofit organizations to discuss about persistent identifiers.
John Chodacki from the University of California shared it with us. Well, we started PIDapalooza because we wanted to have a conference about persistent identifiers that wasn't boring and super dry. And so we talked about how we should make an entire conference about PIDs and make it really outstandingly fun. Hence, PIDapalooza.
So basically the story has to do with those organizing a conference that was totally Rock and Roll. When we were thinking about what fun things we could do on the persistence theme, we thought of the Bangles' song Eternal Flame, so we bought one online. But the legend was really born because we brought it from the US to Iceland, and we plugged it in onstage.
Didn't realize the interoperability issues there! It's short cutted and actually caught on fire. A cautionary tale about sustainability and risk management here. But we bought a new one for the next PIDapalooza and figured out how to handle different countries' outlets. And each year we would have storytelling of it, and have the plugin in ceremony and the passing of the torch ceremony.
So, it kind of became part of the folklore. Thanks to John for this piece of history increasing the awareness of the usefulness and the importance of PIDs. And increasing their widest use as possible within the broad research community remains the most important task to achieve. Thank you very much. Wow those hits just keep coming. Kind of like being in a Rocky movie-- up against the ropes and begging for the bell to ring!
But wait, there's more. Who can forget these classics? Hi, everyone. I'm Margie Hlava. And I'm Heather Kotulla. We're both from Access Innovations, and we'd like to give a special thanks to Sam Barrett behind us on the cello.
Marriage debate has been around since books began collecting. Classification came first and then came cataloging. You can add the CIA and Civil War kids and up. These will do. And don't forget. But do not submit the ideas this content to consider that we think has built up new bearings so that data rates research and navigation taxonomy for website so college thinking there the data here to stay.
We can not search without useful text for hidden strings tax one three retrieval. There's more to metadata than IDs and codes. So let's explain the span, the repertoire. There's subject metadata, which includes things like thestory, taxonomies, ontologies, authority lists apply to the content. There's credit which goes over author roles and their individual contributions and many, many others.
That data, it's about your data. It is core to what we do. There are many kinds to make the references. Standards for conformity for all. I says an ISBN and we have an organic to deal in the credit and a multitude of others.
For you the ANSI is create these numbers. They seem to multiply by 9. There is and of course an ISO and then the bisect to ensure the code is right. Associations make codes for numbers that apply to industry.
You can't avoid them. They work together in ensuring that Congress will to have somebody that records and contact us, especially if we do not know. We need guidance for navigation to tell us exactly how to search and where to go.
Well, of course there is a center. Well, in fact, there's really 3339.19 and the w3c. We are in for getting ISO 25 964. It's so hard to sing along when the syllables in the center count up to more than four.
They support our searches and navigation by applying words as code. You tag the car, you turn them into searches so users can find what their subject matter. Data is not a code said. It is a term set for content retrievals from the information.
See when you apply your method data, do not forget to select returns taxonomies for navigation ontologies knowledge maps are the sorry will do you are my data my matter data you are you so many ways you'll never see it, but we sure need and please use subject matter data everyday together.
All these different pieces of metadata give a complete picture for which we are very thankful. They seem pissed. Sweeney the identity that writer and author. Like me, I once was a novice.
But now I am unique. Once I know. But now I have a meeting once more. And that is sorry. My kid died and credits my obscurity. Really, I hope relishes doing that work in the down year the hour first be leaving.
The register has problems on utility to me. They're my ID circulars. They will my identity and file be as long as research in New York.
When we need them, they're publishing all the papers we need. And we still need paper. We have, you know, we know what to say to deadlines. Then when we first.
You think. Thank you for listening to this wonderful session at nice. Plus, I know what you're thinking. I can get all these songs in one set of CDS. Please tell me more. How can I get one of these remarkable collections? Well settle down. Settle down.
There's no need to fly around the world. Or maybe even just take a jet ride, like into the metadata zone. Highway to the danger zone right into. Third date is on heading into publication. Author needs identification where they're from, then you must see. Or a University highway to the data zone.
Take your right to. Danger zone. You'll never say Hello to you until your data is identified. You'll never know what you can do to your DTDC is ready to fly. Got a tag? Samantha cleave. Oh, it's where I burn to be. The further on the edge.
The heart of the intensity. Oh, Yeah. Who can forget those old classics? Well, certainly not Kenny Loggins. Where are the authors coming from? Well, hold on, folks. This ride is going to be a thriller. For publishers looking for authors, researchers who want to be starting something.
It's important to have a strong metadata management from the beginning through to publication. So whether you've spent in Bangkok or your authors and reviewers are all coming out of the Eastern regions or Africa, proper metadata capture ensures country of origin and other discounts are properly applied during APC collection and transformative agreement tracking.
Meanwhile, back here in the USA, those folks who come from a land down under and those born in the USA, don't you forget about me or that London is calling. It's not the dire straits you think it is. These authors, researchers shouldn't have to fight for their right to publish while publishers understand that you can't get money for nothing. One way or another, this crucial metadata must be collected early and tagged semantically.
So the final countdown to publish content isn't the end of the world as we know it. Where is the author funding coming from? Well, that's a great question. Let's dance. Understanding the career stage of authors allows more in depth tracking from early researcher to rock star, which can inform list and product development as well as journal development.
Following the funding allows publishers more insight into the creation support of author, subject communities, which in turn gives more opportunity to engage direct with those communities. Following the funding leads to author retention. Today's authors might be tomorrow's reviewers, book, chapter authors or editorial board members, even ICs. Meanwhile, taking data to the universities and publishers and using it to discuss transformative agreements, funders, usage, informed offers is a great way to build relationships.
Everyone involved needs to collect, examine and analyze the data held on subscription holdings and APC payments for the institutions. I want to know what data is. Tools like apter cypress help gather and collate this data for you. Negotiations can't happen if you are not all looking at the same data.
Love and data is a battlefield. Adding hierarchies and other connected data helps institutions see where the subscriptions are coming from and where the publisher's needs will be best met. Dissemination and discoverability. Papa don't preach about hierarchies or data. A full understanding of who authors are and where they are from when coupled with usage data at an institutional level, can give publishers a full 360 degree insight into creation and use.
This information can be used for much more detailed conversations than previously with consortia and individual research institutes on RDP deals. Gathering data is an opportunity to develop a community if large amounts of usage are seen, but no authors. You can use the data to help find those authors. It doesn't all have to be Purple Rain.
Data on funders can be used as an insight for portfolio and subject development. Well, folks, if you're like me, you're probably sitting there thinking it's over. Now we can get to the good part. How can you get this collection for yourself? Well, if you act now, you not only get this great collection and an autographed copy of my best seller, how did I get myself into this?
The Johnny C story. But you also get a free set of Ginsu knives. Just send $1 Plus postage and handling to me. Johnny c, thank you and good listening.
Form Title Download
Transcript
Form Title Bookmark
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Form Title Share
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Form Title Accessibility and Keyboard Shortcuts
The cadmore media player is a professional video and audio player experience designed to deliver media as well as relevant transcript, segmentation, and metadata. On the screen is a traditional html video player with buttons such as play, pause, forward, captioning, language and play speed selection and more. Adjacent to the video player are generally tabs, one of which shows a scrolling transcript of the video and the other shows any segmentation of the media, sometimes referred to as chapters. At the top of the video is a menu bar containing an Explore button and Tools button. The Explore button allows you to dig deeper into the video by opening up an explore dialog which contains tabs for a visual navigation of the video using thumbnails, an about tab which contains rich metadata about the media, a segments tab which contains further information about the video, and a related tab which contains links to other media related to this media. The tools button opens a menu with options for sharing the media on social media, creating bookmarking links, creating embed codes for your website, generating citations, and more.
Keyboard Shortcuts
Keyboard shortcuts only work while you are in forms mode. By entering forms mode, you will be able to quickly access portions of the media player with single key commands.
Spacebar: Play/Pause Toggle
I: Info Menu,
O: Tools Menu
T: Transcript Tab,
S: Segments Tab
F: Forward 15,
R: Rewind 15
L: Languages,
P: Playspeed
M: Mute Toggle,
V: Volume Bar
N: Video Only Toggle,
B: Full Screen Toggle
C: Captions Toggle
Escape: Closes dialogs and menus / Exits Player
Z: Next Transcript Chapter
X: Previous Transcript Chapter
Q: Next Transcript Paragraph
W: Previous Transcript Paragraph
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Embed Size
-
You Size - Responsive
-
We Size - Responsive
-
Picture Overlay Popup
-
400 x 225
-
512 x 288
-
400 x 700
-
768 x 1024
-
1024 x 512
-
1280 x 608
Form Title Cite
No citation provided.
Info
Segments
Related
Thumbnails
Exit Clip Mode
You have requested to see a portion of the video outside of the clip.
Click OK to switch to the full video or click if you would like to stay inside the clip. You can always go back to the clip with Tools and Clip Mode