Abstract
In data management the high-level FAIR principles are interpreted and implemented in various FAIR metrics. While this specific interpretation is intended, it leads to the situation of several metrics with different evaluation results for the same digital object. This work conducts an organizational-formal comparison, showing up elements like categories of importance in the considered metrics, as well as a content-wise comparison of selected metrics how their differ in their interpretation. The results give orientation especially to everyone in science aiming to find the right metric to make their data FAIR.
Funder
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Reference24 articles.
1. M. D. Wilkinson, M. Dumontier, I. J. Aalbersberg, et al., “The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship,” Sci Data, vol. 3, no. 160018, Mar. 2016. DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18.
2. S. Bechhofer, D. De Roure, M. Gamble, C. Goble, and I. Buchan, “Research Objects: Towards Exchange and Reuse of Digital Knowledge,” Nature Precedings, Jul. 2010. DOI: 10.1038/npre.2010.4626.1.
3. A. Jacobsen, R. de Miranda Azevedo, N. Juty, et al., “FAIR Principles: Interpretations and Implementation Considerations,” Data Intelligence, vol. 2, no. 1-2, pp. 10–29, Jan. 2020. DOI: 10.1162/dint_r_00024.
4. A. Devaraju and R. Huber, “An automated solution for measuring the progress toward fair research data,” Patterns, vol. 2, no. 11, Nov. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.patter.2021.100370.
5. M. D. Wilkinson, S.-A. Sansone, G. Marjan, J. Nordling, R. Dennis, and D. Hecker, “FAIR Assessment Tools: Towards an ”Apples to Apples” Comparisons,” Zenodo, Dec. 2022. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.7463421.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献