Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (27)
- Article (5)
- Other (5)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Working Paper (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (43)
Keywords
- Forschungsdaten (25)
- Datenmanagement (20)
- Metadaten (19)
- Infrastruktur (18)
- Forschung (12)
- Computerlinguistik (11)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (8)
- CLARIN (7)
- Digital Humanities (5)
- Standardisierung (5)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (43) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (33)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (6)
Publisher
In der Bund-Länder-Vereinbarung (BLV) zu Aufbau und Förderung einer Nationalen Forschungsdateninfrastruktur (NFDI) (im Folgenden BLV-NFDI) wird in §1 festgehalten, dass mit der Förderung "eine Etablierung und Fortentwicklung eines übergreifenden Forschungsdatenmanagements" und damit eine "Steigerung der Effizienz des gesamten Wissenschaftssystems verfolgt" wird. In der BLV-NFDI werden dazu sieben Ziele vorgegeben, die eine Verfeinerung dieser Hauptziele darstellen. Dieses White Paper formuliert das gemeinsame Verständnis der beteiligten Konsortien für die sieben in der BLV-NFDI vorgegebenen Ziele. Auf der Grundlage dieses Verständnisses hat die Task Force Evaluation und Reporting Vorschläge gemacht, wie das Erreichen der Ziele erfasst, beschrieben und gemessen werden kann.
This White Paper sets out commonly agreed definitions on activities of consortia within NFDI. It aims to provide a common basis for reporting and reference regarding selected questions of cross-consortial relevance in DFG’s template for the Interim Reports. The questions were prioritised by an NFDI Task Force on Evaluation and Reporting (formerly Task Force Monitoring) as a result of discussing possible answers to the DFG template. In this process the need to agree on a generalizable meaning of terms commonly used in the context of NFDI, and reporting in particular, were identified from cross-consortial perspectives. Questions that showed the highest requirement on clarification are discussed in this White Paper. As NFDI evolves, the Task Force will likely propose further joint approaches for reporting in information infrastructures.
While each of broad relevance, the questions addressed relate to substantially different aspects of consortia’s work. They are thus also structured slightly different.
Linguistics is facing the challenge of many other sciences as it continues to grow into increasingly complex subfields, each with its own separate or overarching branches. While linguists are certainly aware of the overall structure of the research field, they cannot follow all developments other than those of their subfields. It is thus important to help specialists but also newcomers alike to bushwhack through evolved or unknown territory of linguistic data. A considerable amount of research data in linguistics is described with metadata. While studies described and published in archived journals and conference proceedings receive a quite homogeneous set of metadata tags — e.g., author, title, publisher —, this does not hold for the empirical data and analyses that underlie such studies. Moreover, lexicons, grammars, experimental data, and other types of resources come in different forms; and to make things worse, their description in terms of metadata is also not uniform, if existing at all. These problems are well-known and there are now a number of international initiatives — e.g., CLARIN, FlareNet, MetaNet, DARIAH — to build infrastructures for managing linguistic resources. The NaLiDa project, funded by the German Research Foundation, aims at facilitating the management and access to linguistic resources originating from German research institutions. In cooperation with the German SFB 833 research center, we are developing a combination of faceted and full-text search to give integrated access through heterogeneous metadata sets. Our approach is supported by a central registry for metadata field descriptors, and a component repository for structured groups of data categories as larger building blocks.
Measuring the quality of metadata is only possible by assessing the quality of the underlying schema and the metadata instance. We propose some factors that are measurable automatically for metadata according to the CMD framework, taking into account the variability of schemas that can be defined in this framework. The factors include among others the number of elements, the (re-)use of reusable components, the number of filled in elements. The resulting score can serve as an indicator of the overall quality of the CMD instance, used for feedback to metadata providers or to provide an overview of the overall quality of metadata within a repository. The score is independent of specific schemas and generalizable. An overall assessment of harvested metadata is provided in form of statistical summaries and the distribution, based on a corpus of harvested metadata. The score is implemented in XQuery and can be used in tools, editors and repositories.
The Component Metadata Infrastructure (CMDI) in a project on sustainable linguistic resources
(2012)
The sustainable archiving of research data for predefined time spans has become increasingly important to researchers and is stipulated by funding organizations with the obligatory task of being observed by researchers. An important aspect in view of such a sustainable archiving of language resources is the creation of metadata, which can be used for describing, finding and citing resources. In the present paper, these aspects are dealt with from the perspectives of two projects: the German project for Sustainability of Linguistic Data at the University of Tubingen (NaLiDa, cf. http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/nalida) and the Dutch-Flemish HLT Agency hosted at the Institute for Dutch Lexicology (TST-Centrale, cf.http://www.inl.nl/tst-centrale). Both projects unfold their approaches to the creation of components and profiles using the Component Metadata Infrastructure (CMDI) as underlying metadata schema for resource descriptions, highlighting their experiences as well as advantages and disadvantages in using CMDI.
The CMDI Explorer
(2020)
We present the CMDI Explorer, a tool that empowers users to easily explore the contents of complex CMDI records and to process selected parts of them with little effort. The tool allows users, for instance, to analyse virtual collections represented by CMDI records, and to send collection items to other CLARIN services such as the Switchboard for subsequent processing. The CMDI Explorer hence adds functionality that many users felt was lacking from the CLARIN tool space.
The CLARIN infrastructure as an interoperable language technology platform for SSH and beyond
(2023)
CLARIN is a European Research Infrastructure Consortium developing and providing a federated and interoperable platform to support scientists in the field of the Social Sciences and Humanities in carrying-out language-related research. This contribution provides an overview of the entire infrastructure with a particular focus on tool interoperability, ease of access to research data, tools and services, the importance of sharing knowledge within and across (national) communities, and community building. By taking into account FAIR principles from the very beginning, CLARIN succeeded in becoming a successful example of a research infrastructure that is actively used by its members. The benefits CLARIN members reap from their infrastructure secure a future for their common good that is both sustainable and attractive to partners beyond the original target groups.
In dem auf die Forschungsdaten sprach- und textbasierter Disziplinen ausgerichteten NFDI-Konsortium Text+ spielen Normdaten eine zentrale Rolle für die interoperable Beschreibung und semantische Verknüpfung von verteilten Datenquellen. Insbesondere die Gemeinsame Normdatei (GND) ist ein bedeutender Hub im Zentrum eines im Entstehen begriffenen, domänenübergreifenden Wissensgraphen. Diese Funktion soll im Rahmen von Text+ durch den Aufbau einer GND-Agentur für sprach- und textbasierte Forschungsdaten weiterentwickelt und ausgebaut werden. Ziel ist es, niedrigschwellige, qualitätsgesicherte Beteiligungsmöglichkeiten für Forschende zu schaffen und zugleich den Vernetzungsgrad der GND auch durch Terminologie-Mappings zu erweitern. Spezifische Anforderungen und Nutzungspraktiken werden hierbei anhand der Datendomänen von Text+ exemplifziert.
This paper describes the status of the standardization efforts of a Component Metadata approach for describing Language Resources with metadata. Different linguistic and Language & Technology communities as CLARIN, META-SHARE and NaLiDa use this component approach and see its standardization of as a matter for cooperation that has the possibility to create a large interoperable domain of joint metadata. Starting with an overview of the component metadata approach together with the related semantic interoperability tools and services as the ISOcat data category registry and the relation registry we explain the standardization plan and efforts for component metadata within ISO TC37/SC4. Finally, we present information about uptake and plans of the use of component metadata within the three mentioned linguistic and L&T communities.
Signposts for CLARIN
(2020)
An implementation of CMDI-based signposts and its use is presented in this paper. Arnold et al. 2020 present Signposts as a solution to challenges in long-term preservation of corpora, especially corpora that are continuously extended and subject to modification, e.g., due to legal injunctions, but also may overlap with respect to constituents, and may be subject to migrations to new data formats. We describe the contribution Signposts can make to the CLARIN infrastructure and document the design for the CMDI profile.
Signposts for CLARIN
(2021)
An implementation of CMDI-based signposts and its use is presented in this paper. Arnold, Fisseni et al. (2020) present signposts as a solution to challenges in long-term preservation of corpora. Though applicable to digital resources in general, we focus on corpora, especially those that are continuously extended or subject to modification, e.g., due to legal injunctions, but also may overlap with respect to constituents, and may be subject to migrations to new data formats. We describe the contribution signposts can make to the CLARIN infrastructure, notably virtual collections, and document the design for the CMDI profile.
Lexicon schemas and their use are discussed in this paper from the perspective of lexicographers and field linguists. A variety of lexicon schemas have been developed, with goals ranging from computational lexicography (DATR) through archiving (LIFT, TEI) to standardization (LMF, FSR). A number of requirements for lexicon schemas are given. The lexicon schemas are introduced and compared to each other in terms of conversion and usability for this particular user group, using a common lexicon entry and providing examples for each schema under consideration. The formats are assessed and the final recommendation is given for the potential users, namely to request standard compliance from the developers of the tools used. This paper should foster a discussion between authors of standards, lexicographers and field linguists.
Lexicography
(2008)
The transfer of research data management from one institution to another infrastructural partner is all but trivial, but can be required,for instance, when an institution faces reorganisation or closure. In a case study, we describe the migration of all research data, identify the challenges we encountered, and discuss how we addressed them. It shows that the moving of research data management to another institution is a feasible, but potentially costly enterprise. Being able to demonstrate the feasibility of research data migration supports the stance of data archives that users can expect high levels of trust and reliability when it comes to data safety and sustainability.
This contribution summarizes the lessons learned from the organization of a joint conference on text analytics research by the Business, Economic, and Related Data (BERD@NFDI) and Text+ consortia within the National Research Data Infrastructure (NFDI) in Germany. The collaboration aimed to identify common ground and foster interdisciplinary dialogue between scholars in the humanities and in the business domain. The lessons learned include the importance of presenting research questions using textual data to establish common ground, similarities in methodology for processing textual data between the consortia, similarities in research data management, and the need for regular interconsortial discussions on textual analysis methods and data. The collaboration proved valuable for interdisciplinary dialogue within the NFDI, and further collaboration between the consortia is planned.
Als Teil der NFDI vernetzt Text+ ortsverteilt verschiedenste Daten und Dienste für die geisteswissenschaftliche Forschung und stellt sie der wissenschaftlichen Gemeinschaft FAIR zur Verfügung. In diesem Beitrag beschreiben wir die Umsetzung beispielhaft im Bereich der Text+ Datendomäne Sammlungen anhand von Korpora, die in verschiedenen Disziplinen Verwendung finden. Die Infrastruktur ist auf Erweiterbarkeit ausgelegt, so dass auch weitere Ressourcen über Text+ verfügbar gemacht werden können. Enthalten ist auch ein Ausblick auf weitere zu erwartende Entwicklungen. Ein Beitrag zur 9. Tagung des Verbands "Digital Humanities im deutschsprachigen Raum" - DHd 2023 Open Humanities Open Culture.
Wenn man verschiedenartige Forschungsdaten über Metadaten inhaltlich beschreiben möchte, sind bibliografische Angaben allein nicht ausreichend. Vielmehr benötigt man zusätzliche Beschreibungsmittel, die der Natur und Komplexität gegebener Forschungsressourcen Rechnung tragen. Verschiedene Arten von Forschungsdaten bedürfen verschiedener Metadatenprofile, die über gemeinsame Komponenten definiert werden. Solche Forschungsdaten können gesammelt (z.B. über OAI-PMH-Harvesting) und mittels Facetten-basierter Suche über eine einheitliche Schnittstelle exploriert werden. Der beschriebene Anwendungskontext kann über sprachwissenschaftliche Daten hinaus verallgemeinert werden.
The Component MetaData Infrastructure (CMDI) provides a lego-brick framework for the creation, use and re-use of self-defined metadata formats. The design of CMDI can be a force forgood, but history shows that it has often been misunderstood or badly executed. Consequently,it has led the community towards the dark ages of metadata clutter rather than the bright side of semantic interoperability. In this abstract, we report on the condition of CMDI but also outlinean agenda to make the CMDI world a better place to use, share and profit from metadata.