Advertisement

Creating an integrated collaborative environment for materials research

  • Matthew D. Jacobsen
  • James R. Fourman
  • Kevin M. Porter
  • Elizabeth A. Wirrig
  • Mark D. Benedict
  • Bryon J. Foster
  • Charles H. WardEmail author
Case Study

Abstract

This paper describes the creation of a cyberinfrastructure to facilitate collaborative materials research in a laboratory environment that supports the discovery, development, and sustainment of materials and processing solutions. The infrastructure provides a web-based interface supporting group and project spaces within which researchers can easily organize, share, and collaborate on the results of their experimental and computational efforts. It seamlessly connects researchers with experimental and computational resources for easy generation, collection, and storage of digital data to provide instant access to results with no intermediate transfers. Persistent identifiers and metadata tagging are used to ensure historical research data are discoverable, interpretable, and reusable. The architecture is designed to be modular and agile and is based on federation of both applications and data through a central service bus that brokers all transactions. It is comprised of a number of open-source, commercial, and non-commercial software packages that provide the specific functionality needed to meet the large number of system requirements. This collaborative environment is essential to enabling a large research organization to conduct a research program consistent with the discipline of Integrated Computational Materials Engineering by allowing the seamless connection of experiment to model through pedigreed digital data with complete provenance.

Keywords

Data management Workflow Collaboration Materials Genome Initiative Integrated Computational Materials Engineering 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to a number of individuals at the Materials and Manufacturing Directorate of the Air Force Research Laboratory for invaluable input on the design and functionality of ICE including Jon Miller, Andy Rosenberger, Zlatomir Apostolotov, Virginia Meeks, Robyn Bradford, Geoffrey Frank, Hilmar Koerner, Eddie Schwalbach, and Joel Murray. Support for this effort was provided by the Materials and Manufacturing Directorate of the Air Force Research Laboratory.

Availability of data and materials

Code supporting the central service bus, workflow management, persistent identification, and Data Type Registry are available on request from the authors. These tools will be posted in the near future on a Git-based source code repository.

Authors’ contributions

MDJ was chief architect of ICE. JRF was the primary developer of the CSB, equipment connectivity, and sub-component integration. KMP was responsible as the primary developer of the PID server, DTR, and generator and Metaverse. EAW analyzed individual research requirements and provided design documentation to the development team. MDB provided significant design and functionality input as well as tested key functions of ICE. BJF managed connectivity with experimental equipment. CHW was overall project manager. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. 1.
    Committee on Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (2008) Integrated Computational Materials Engineering: a transformational discipline for improved competitiveness and national security. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    The White House (2015) The Materials Genome Initiative for industrial competitiveness. http://www.whitehouse.gov/mgi. Accessed 17 Dec 2015Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gibbon GA (1996) A brief history of LIMS. Laboratory Automation and Information Management 32:1–5. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/1381-141X(95)00024-K CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Taylor KT (2006) The status of electronic laboratory notebooks for chemistry and biology. Current Opinion in Drug Discovery & Development 9(3):348–353Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hanisch RJ, Berriman GB, Lazio TJW, Emery Bunn S, Evans J, McGlynn TA, Plante R (2015) The virtual astronomical observatory: re-engineering access to astronomical data. Astronomy and Computing 11B:190–209. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ascom.2015.03.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Klimeck G, McLennan M, Brophy SP, Adams GB III, Lundstrom MS (2008) nanoHUB.org: advancing education and research in nanotechnology. Comput Sci Eng 10:17–23. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2008.120 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Goff SA, Vaughn M, McKay S et al (2011) The iPlant Collaborative: cyberinfrastructure for plant biology. Frontiers in plant science 2(34):1–16. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2011.00034 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    McLennan M, Kennel R (2010) HUBzero: a platform for dissemination and collaboration in computational science and engineering. Comput Sci Eng 12 48(2):48–53. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/MCSE.2010.41 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    NEEShub (2015) https://doi.org/nees.org/. Accessed 17 Dec 2015.
  10. 10.
    Kuriyan K, Catlin AC, Reklaitis GV (2009) pharmaHUB: building a virtual organization for pharmaceutical engineering and science. Journal of Pharmaceutical Innovation 4(2):81–89. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12247-009-9061-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    University of Illinois. (2015) KnowEnG. https://doi.org/knoweng.org/. Accessed 17 Dec 2015.
  12. 12.
    MyGeoHUB (2015) https://doi.org/mygeohub.org/. Accessed 17 Dec 2015.
  13. 13.
    Cebon D, Ashby MF (2006) Engineering materials informatics. MRS Bulletin 31:1004–1012. doi: https://doi.org/10.1557/mrs2006.229 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ward CH, Warren JA, Hanisch RJ (2014) Making materials science and engineering data more valuable research products. Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation 3:22. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40192-014-0022-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Boyce DE, Dawson PR, Miller MP (2009) The design of a software environment for organizing, sharing, and archiving materials data. Metall and Mat Trans A 40(10):2301–2318. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-009-9889-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    University of Michigan. (2015) PRISMS project. https://doi.org/prisms-center.org/#/home. Accessed 17 Dec 2015.
  17. 17.
    University of Illinois. (2015) T2C2: Timely and Trusted Curation and Coordination. https://doi.org/t2c2.csl.illinois.edu/. Accessed 17 Dec 2015.
  18. 18.
    Kleese van Dam K, Carson JP, Corrigan AL, Einstein DR, Guillen ZC, Heath BS, Kuprat AP, Lanekoff IT, Lansing CS, Laskin J, Li D, Liu Y, Marshall MJ, Miller EA, Orr G, Pinheiro da Silva P, Ryu S, Szymanski CJ, Thomas M (2013) Velo and REXAN—integrated data management and high speed analysis for experimental facilities. In: 8th IEEE International Conference on EScience 2012. IEEE Press, Washington, DC, pp 1–9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/eScience.2012.6404463 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Carey NS, Budavári T, Daphalapurkar N, Ramesh KT (2016) Data integration for materials research. Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation 5:7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40192-016-0049-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fielding RT (2000) Chapter 5: representational state transfer (REST), Architectural styles and the design of network-based software architectures (Ph.D.). University of California, IrvineGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Django Software Foundation (2016) Django project. https://doi.org/www.djangoproject.com. Accessed: 17 Dec 2015
  22. 22.
    Puchala B, Tarcea G, Marquis EA, Hedstrom M, Jagadish HV, Allison JE (2016) The Materials Commons: a collaboration platform and information repository for the global materials community. JOM 68. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-016-1998-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kwok Cheung K, Drennan J, Hunter J (2009) Towards an ontology for data-driven discovery of new materials. IEEE Intelligent Systems 24(1):47–56. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2009.13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    HUBzero Foundation. (2015) HUBzero® https://doi.org/hubzero.org/. Accessed 17 Dec 2015.
  25. 25.
    MongoDB, Inc. (2016) MongoDB, https://doi.org/www.mongodb.org/. Accessed 26 Jan 2016.
  26. 26.
    MTS Systems Corporation. (2015) EchoTM. https://doi.org/www.mts.com/en/products/producttype/test-components/software/Echo/. Accessed 17 Dec 2015.
  27. 27.
    Plotly (2015) https://doi.org/plot.ly/. Accessed 17 Dec 2015.
  28. 28.
    Groeber MA, Jackson MA (2014) DREAM. 3D: a digital representation environment for the analysis of microstructure in 3D. Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation 3(5). doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-9772-3-5
  29. 29.
    OpenID® (2015) OpenID Connect. https://doi.org/openid.net/connect/. Accessed 17 Dec 2015.

Copyright information

© The Author(s). 2016

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://doi.org/creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew D. Jacobsen
    • 1
  • James R. Fourman
    • 2
  • Kevin M. Porter
    • 3
  • Elizabeth A. Wirrig
    • 2
  • Mark D. Benedict
    • 1
  • Bryon J. Foster
    • 1
  • Charles H. Ward
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Materials and Manufacturing DirectorateAir Force Research LaboratoryWright-Patterson AFBUSA
  2. 2.RCF Information Systems, Inc.BeavercreekUSA
  3. 3.Southwestern Ohio Council for Higher EducationDaytonUSA

Personalised recommendations