Advertisement

Reshaping the Knowledge Graph by Connecting Researchers, Data and Practices in ResearchSpace

  • Dominic OldmanEmail author
  • Diana TanaseEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11137)

Abstract

ResearchSpace is an open source platform designed at the British Museum to help establish a community of researchers, where their underlying activities are framed by data sharing, active engagement in formal arguments, and semantic publishing. Using Semantic Web languages and technologies, the innovations of the system are shaped by a social conceptualisation of the graph-based representation of information. This is employed by integrated semantic components aimed at subject experts that offer mechanisms to create, annotate, assert, argue, search, cite, and justify data-driven research. This paper showcases a new onto-epistemological approach that supports researchers to contribute to a growing and sustainable corpus of knowledge that has history, not just provenance, built-in. It describes our considerations in designing for interdisciplinary collaboration, usability and trust in the digital space, highlighted by use cases in archaeology, art history, and history of science.

References

  1. 1.
    Alani, H.: Unlocking the potential of public sector information with semantic web technology. In: Aberer, K., et al. (eds.) ASWC/ISWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 708–721. Springer, Heidelberg (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76298-0_51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atkins, D.: Revolutionizing science and engineering through cyberinfrastructure: report of the national science foundation blue-ribbon advisory panel on cyberinfrastructure (2003). http://hdl.handle.net/10150/106224
  3. 3.
    Bechhofer, S., et al.: Why linked data is not enough for scientists. Future Gener. Comp. Syst. 29(2), 599–611 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2011.08.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Capadisli, S., Guy, A., Verborgh, R., Lange, C., Auer, S., Berners-Lee, T.: Decentralised authoring, annotations and notifications for a read-write web with dokieli. In: Cabot, J., De Virgilio, R., Torlone, R. (eds.) ICWE 2017. LNCS, vol. 10360, pp. 469–481. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60131-1_33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dean, K.: Towards a Historical-Materialist Science of Thinking, Chap. 18, pp. 53–73. Routledge, London (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Doerr, M.: The CIDOC conceptual reference module: an ontological approach to semantic interoperability of metadata. AI Mag. 24(3), 75–92 (2003). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=958671.958678Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Doerr, M., Kritsotaki, A., Boutsika, K.: Factual argumentation - a core model for assertions making. JOCCH 3(3), 8:1–8:34 (2011). http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1921614.1921615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ehrlinger, L., Wöß, W.: Towards a definition of knowledge graphs. In: SEMANTiCS (Posters, Demos, SuCCESS) (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gradmann, S., Hennicke, S., Tschumpel, G.: Modelling the scholarly domain beyond infrastructure. In: DHd 2016, p. 143 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kräutli, F., Valleriani, M.: CorpusTracer: a CIDOC database for tracing knowledge networks. Digit. Scholarsh. Humanit. (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kuhn, T., Dumontier, M.: Genuine semantic publishing. Data Sci. 1(1–2), 139–154 (2017). https://content.iospress.com/articles/data-science/ds010Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marketakis, Y., et al.: X3ML mapping framework for information integration in cultural heritage and beyond. Int. J. Digit. Libr. 18(4), 301–319 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-016-0179-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Meghini, C., Bartalesi, V., Metilli, D., Benedetti, F.: Introducing narratives in Europeana: preliminary steps. In: Kirikova, M., et al. (eds.) ADBIS 2017. CCIS, vol. 767, pp. 333–342. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67162-8_33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Oldman, D., Doerr, M., Gradmann, S.: Zen and the Art of Linked Data, Chap. 18, pp. 251–273. Wiley-Blackwell (2015). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118680605.ch18
  15. 15.
    Oldman, D., Doerr, M., de Jong, G., Norton, B., Wikman, T.: Realizing Lessons of the last 20 years: a manifesto for data provisioning & aggregation services for the digital humanities (a position paper). D-Lib Mag. 20(7/8) (2014). http://dblp.uni-trier.de/db/journals/dlib/dlib20.html#OldmanDJNW14
  16. 16.
    Paulheim, H.: Knowledge graph refinement: a survey of approaches and evaluation methods. Semant. Web 8(3), 489–508 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-160218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rockwell, G.: As transparent as infrastructure: on the research of cyberinfrastructure in the humanities. In: Online Humanities Scholarship: The Shape of Things to Come, pp. 1–20 (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schneider, J., Groza, T., Passant, A.: A review of argumentation for the social semantic web. Semant. Web 4, 159–218 (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stewart, C.A., Simms, S., Plale, B., Link, M., Hancock, D.Y., Fox, G.C.: What is cyberinfrastructure. In: Proceedings of the 38th Annual ACM SIGUCCS Fall Conference: Navigation and Discovery, SIGUCCS 2010, pp. 37–44. ACM, New York (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1145/1878335.1878347
  20. 20.
    Veltman, K.H.: Towards a semantic web for culture. J. Digit. Inf. 4(4) (2004). http://journals.tdl.org/jodi/article/view/113

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.British MuseumLondonUK

Personalised recommendations