Mapping Research Data at the University of Bologna
Authors:
C. Basalti,
G. Caldoni,
S. Coppini,
B. Gualandi,
M. Marino,
F. Masini,
S. Peroni
Abstract:
Research data management (RDM) strategies and practices play a pivotal role in adhering to the paradigms of reproducibility and transparency by enabling research sharing in accordance with the principles of Open Science. Discipline-specificity is an essential factor when understanding RDM declinations, to tailor a comprehensive support service and to enhance interdisciplinarity.
In this paper we…
▽ More
Research data management (RDM) strategies and practices play a pivotal role in adhering to the paradigms of reproducibility and transparency by enabling research sharing in accordance with the principles of Open Science. Discipline-specificity is an essential factor when understanding RDM declinations, to tailor a comprehensive support service and to enhance interdisciplinarity.
In this paper we present the results of a mapping carried out to gather information on research data generated and managed within the University of Bologna (UniBO). The aim is to identify differences and commonalities between disciplines and potential challenges for institutional support.
We analyzed the data management plans (DMPs) of European competitive projects drafted by researchers affiliated with UniBO. We applied descriptive statistics to the collected variables to answer three main questions: How diverse is the range of data managed within the University of Bologna? Which trends of problems and patterns in terms of data management can influence/improve data stewardship service? Is there an interdisciplinary approach to data production within the University?
The research work evidenced many points of contact between different disciplines in terms of data produced, formats used and modest predilection for data reuse. Hot topics such as data confidentiality, needed either on privacy or intellectual property rights (IPR) premises, and long-term preservation pose challenges to all researchers.
These results show an increasing attention to RDM while highlighting the relevance of training and support to face the relatively new challenges posed by this approach.
△ Less
Submitted 26 February, 2025;
originally announced March 2025.
Identifying and correcting invalid citations due to DOI errors in Crossref data
Authors:
Alessia Cioffi,
Sara Coppini,
Arcangelo Massari,
Arianna Moretti,
Silvio Peroni,
Cristian Santini,
Nooshin Shahidzadeh Asadi
Abstract:
This work aims to identify classes of DOI mistakes by analysing the open bibliographic metadata available in Crossref, highlighting which publishers were responsible for such mistakes and how many of these incorrect DOIs could be corrected through automatic processes. By using a list of invalid cited DOIs gathered by OpenCitations while processing the OpenCitations Index of Crossref open DOI-to-DO…
▽ More
This work aims to identify classes of DOI mistakes by analysing the open bibliographic metadata available in Crossref, highlighting which publishers were responsible for such mistakes and how many of these incorrect DOIs could be corrected through automatic processes. By using a list of invalid cited DOIs gathered by OpenCitations while processing the OpenCitations Index of Crossref open DOI-to-DOI citations (COCI) in the past two years, we retrieved the citations in the January 2021 Crossref dump to such invalid DOIs. We processed these citations by keeping track of their validity and the publishers responsible for uploading the related citation data in Crossref. Finally, we identified patterns of factual errors in the invalid DOIs and the regular expressions needed to catch and correct them. The outcomes of this research show that only a few publishers were responsible for and/or affected by the majority of invalid citations. We extended the taxonomy of DOI name errors proposed in past studies and defined more elaborated regular expressions that can clean a higher number of mistakes in invalid DOIs than prior approaches. The data gathered in our study can enable investigating possible reasons for DOI mistakes from a qualitative point of view, helping publishers identify the problems underlying their production of invalid citation data. Also, the DOI cleaning mechanism we present could be integrated into the existing process (e.g. in COCI) to add citations by automatically correcting a wrong DOI. This study was run strictly following Open Science principles, and, as such, our research outcomes are fully reproducible.
△ Less
Submitted 7 March, 2022; v1 submitted 22 November, 2021;
originally announced November 2021.
