Usage-Driven Dublin Core Descriptor Selection

A Case Study Using the Dendro Platform for Research Dataset Description
  • João Rocha da SilvaEmail author
  • Cristina Ribeiro
  • João Correia Lopes
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9819)


Dublin Core schemas are the core metadata models of most repositories, and this includes recent repositories dedicated to datasets. DC descriptors are generic and are being adapted to the needs of different communities with the so-called Dublin Core Application Profiles. DCAPs rely on the agreement within user communities, in a process mainly driven by their evolving needs. In this paper, we propose a complementary automated process, designed to help curators and users discover the descriptors that better suit the needs of a specific research group. We target the description of datasets, and test our approach using Dendro, a prototype research data management platform, where an experimental method is used to rank and present DC Terms descriptors to the users based on their usage patterns. In a controlled experiment, we gathered the interactions of two groups as they used Dendro to describe datasets from selected sources. One of the groups had descriptor ranking on, while the other had the same list of descriptors throughout the whole experiment. Preliminary results show that 1. some DC Terms are filled in more often than others, with different distribution in the two groups, 2. selected descriptors were increasingly accepted by users in detriment of manual selection and 3. users were satisfied with the performance of the platform, as demonstrated by a post-study survey.


Research data management Ontologies Linked Data Ranking User feedback 



This work is financed by the ERDF – European Regional Development Fund through the Operational Programme for Competitiveness and Internationalisation - COMPETE 2020 Programme and by National Funds through the Portuguese funding agency, FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia within project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016736.


  1. 1.
    Piwowar, H., Vision, T.: Data reuse and the open data citation advantage. PeerJ 1, e175 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Piwowar, H., Day, R., Fridsma, D.: Sharing detailed research data is associated with increased citation rate. PLoS ONE 2(3), e308 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Science Magazine: Dealing with data. Challenges and opportunities. Introduction. Science 331, pp. 692–693 (2011). New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jahnke, L., Asher, A., Keralis, S.D.C.: The Problem of Data. Council on Library and Information Resources, Washington, D.C. (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rocha, J., Ribeiro, C., Correia Lopes, J.: Managing research data at U.Porto: requirements, technologies and services. In: Innovations in XML Applications and Metadata Management: Advancing Technologies. IGI Global (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Martinez-Uribe, L.: Using the data audit framework: an Oxford case study. Technical report, Oxford Digital Repositories Steering Group, JISC (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Borgman, C.: The conundrum of sharing research data. J. Am.Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 63(6), 1059–1078 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lord, P., Macdonald, A.: Data curation for e-Science in the UK: an audit to establish requirements for future curation and provision. Technical report, JISC (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lyon, L.: Dealing with Data: Roles, Rights, Responsibilities and Relationships (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Heidorn, P.B.: Shedding light on the dark data in the long tail of science. Libr. Trends 57(2), 280–299 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leonelli, S., Spichtinger, D., Prainsack, B.: Sticks and carrots: encouraging open science at its source. Geo: Geogr. Environ. 2(1), 12–16 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dublin Core Metadata Initiative: Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1 (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dublin Core Metadata Initiative: DCMI Metadata Terms (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heery, R., Patel, M.: Application profiles: mixing and matching metadata schemas. Ariadne, no. 25 (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Malta, M.C., Baptista, A.A.: State of the art on methodologies for the development of a metadata application profile. In: Dodero, J.M., Palomo-Duarte, M., Karampiperis, P. (eds.) MTSR 2012. CCIS, vol. 343, pp. 61–73. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Malta, M., Baptista, A.: A panoramic view on metadata application profiles of the last decade. Int. J. Metadata Semant. Ontol. 9(1), 58–73 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Krause, E.M., Clary, E., Greenberg, J., Ogletree, A.: Evolution of an application profile: advancing metadata best practices through the dryad data repository. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications 2015, pp. 63–75 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Martinez-Uribe, L., Macdonald, S.: User engagement in research data curation. In: Agosti, M., Borbinha, J., Kapidakis, S., Papatheodorou, C., Tsakonas, G. (eds.) ECDL 2009. LNCS, vol. 5714, pp. 309–314. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Eynden, V.V.D., Corti, L., Bishop, L., Horton, L.: Managing and Sharing Data: A Guide to Good Practice, 3rd edn. UK Data Archive University of Essex, Colchester (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ball, A.: Scientific data application profile scoping study report. Technical report, UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, UK (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hodson, S.: ADMIRAL: a data management infrastructure for research activities in the life sciences. Technical report, University of Oxford (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hanahoe, H., Baxter, R., Carter, A., Reetz, J., Riedel, M., Ritz, R., van de Sanden, M., Wittenberg, P.: Second EUDAT Conference Report (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rocha, J., Castro, J., Ribeiro, C., Correia Lopes, J.: The Dendro research data management platform: applying ontologies to long-term preservation in a collaborative environment. In: iPres 2014 Conference Proceedings (2014)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rocha, J., Castro, J., Ribeiro, C., Correia Lopes, J.: Dendro: collaborative research data management built on linked open data. In: Proceedings of the 11th European Semantic Web Conference (2014)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rocha, J., Ribeiro, C., Correia Lopes, J.: Ontology-based multi-domain metadata for research data management using triple stores. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Database Engineering and Applications Symposium (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Amorim, R., Castro, J., Rocha, J., Ribeiro, C.: A comparative study of platforms for research data management: interoperability, metadata capabilities. In: Rocha, A., Correia, A.M., Costanzo, S., Reis, L.P. (eds.) New Contributions in Information Systems and Technologies. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 353, pp. 101–111. Springer, Berlin (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Berners-Lee, T.: Linked Data—Design Issues (2006)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sinha, R., Swearingen, K.: The role of transparency in recommender systems. In: Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2002), p. 830 (2002)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Swearingen, K., Sinha, R.: Beyond algorithms: an HCI perspective on recommender systems. In: 2001 ACM SIGIR 2001 Workshop on Recommender Systems , pp. 1–11 (2001)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Joachims, T., Granka, L., Pan, B.: Accurately interpreting clickthrough data as implicit feedback. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, pp. 154–161 (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Strickroth, S., Pinkwart, N.: High quality recommendations for small communities: the case of a regional parent network. In: Proceedings of the Sixth ACM conference on Recommender Systems, pp. 107–114 (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Goy, A., Magro, D., Petrone, G., Picardi, C., Segnan, M.: Ontology-driven collaborative annotation in shared workspaces. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 54, 435–449 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Greenberg, J., Swauger, S., Feinstein, E.M.: Metadata capital in a data repository. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications 2013, Lisbon, pp. 140–150. Data Dryad Repository (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • João Rocha da Silva
    • 1
    Email author
  • Cristina Ribeiro
    • 2
  • João Correia Lopes
    • 2
  1. 1.Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto/INESC TECPortoPortugal
  2. 2.DEI—Faculdade de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto/INESC TECPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations