Difference between revisions of "Telecon materials"
Anne Wilson (talk | contribs) |
Ramapriyan (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
1) Pick a data life cycle model to work with and identify main elements | 1) Pick a data life cycle model to work with and identify main elements | ||
− | *Rama: has one candidate | + | *Rama: has one candidate from [http://www.cendi.gov/publications/CENDI-2011-1.pdf Scientific Data Management (SDM) for Government Agencies: |
+ | Report from the Workshop to Improve SDM] - see page C-4 for Science Project Lifecycle and page C-5 for a "Generic Science Data Lifecycle" | ||
*Ruth: CU has a table of them | *Ruth: CU has a table of them | ||
*Googling "data life cycle" provides some yield | *Googling "data life cycle" provides some yield |
Revision as of 10:53, February 5, 2013
Plans for January 31, 2013 telecon
Respectfully proposed by Anne. Please chime in.
Potential outcomes of survey
- Cross agency coordination
- Id high priority needs
- Make recommendations for moving forward
- Metrics
- Funding priorities
- Resolving conflicting agency requirements
- Address cultural barriers
Cluster goals for upcoming year
- 6 month, summer ESIP meeting, July 9 - 12?
- Literature review substantially underway
- List of options and a discussions underway
- 12 month, winter ESIP meeting, Jan 2014
- Literature review completed, report written
- "Options Report" available 1 month prior to winter meeting and distributed to panel members
- Panel discussion at winter meeting w/ agency reps re: options, etc.
What do we mean?
- Stewardship addressed in 2009 NRC report: “Ensuring the Integrity, Accessibility, and Stewardship of Research Data in the Digital Age”
- Not addressed: discovery, understanding/trust, access, technical interoperability
- Identify a vision?
Options
- scope? earth science or beyond?
IMO we must at least consider scoping beyond earth sciences, even if we ultimately decide it's not feasible. I would be interested in seeking out "widely cross discipline" user stories. Real stories would be most compelling. How might someone from NIH use earth science data? Or a social scientist? First responders? etc. But, we also must consider resource limitations, costs and risks, as best we can estimate them.
Literature Review
Relevant work has already been done and reports have been written. We should be aware of those efforts and leverage them where possible and appropriate.
- Make a reading list
- Start with References circulated at winter meeting session.
- Get readers/reviewers to read and report back about some portion by summer meeting.
Bold text==Proposed Working Docs, Products==
- Reading list
- Literature Review, for release
- "Options", for release
- Id benefits, goals, costs, risks
- Options Brainstorming, working doc
Resources
- Are there any??? Esp for literature review help?
- Sarah may have time
Telecon scheduling
- We will meet on the 4th Thursday of the month. Next meeting will be Feb 28, 2013.
Anything Else?
Meeting notes
Meeting Outcomes
Please provide feedback and/or comments on the following:
Our main effort at this point is to identify the focus of the effort, a "research agenda for data management". We have chosen to use a data life cycle perspective to do so, starting from a general view and moving towards the more specific. We will likely be limited in how deeply specific we can go.
I believe our our goal for the next month is to:
1) Pick a data life cycle model to work with and identify main elements
- Rama: has one candidate from [http://www.cendi.gov/publications/CENDI-2011-1.pdf Scientific Data Management (SDM) for Government Agencies:
Report from the Workshop to Improve SDM] - see page C-4 for Science Project Lifecycle and page C-5 for a "Generic Science Data Lifecycle"
- Ruth: CU has a table of them
- Googling "data life cycle" provides some yield
Ruth and Rama, can either of you point us to some relevant documentation so we can pick something? Would the group be comfortable if, say, Anne, Ruth and Rama collaborate to pick one, or a group vote, or??? Could we get this done in one week?
2) Create a template that includes life cycle elements from which reviews of the literature can be created and summarized.
3) From the perspective of the chosen data life cycle elements, review the literature listed here, http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/References_to_literature,_sent_by_01/10/13_meeting_session_participants, to see which aspects of the life cycle are supported, which are not, what is known, what is not known.
3a) On the "References to literature" page I added a simple mechanism (a bullet) to allow people to sign up as reviewers for each article on the above page. The following people are able to do some reviewing (with some being already familiar with some of these docs): Anne, Rama, Ruth, Sarah, Steve, Beth, anyone else? Please sign up for a report that needs reviewing.
4) Paul will look into the decadal survey process itself and report back.
We will coordinate these efforts via email.
Our next telecon will be Thursday, 2/28, 1:00 MT. We'll continue to meet at this same hour on the 4th Thursday of the month.