Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Provenance Standards

  • Paolo Missier
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_80749

Synonyms

PROV

Definition

PROV, the Provenance standard, is a family of specifications released in 2013 by the Provenance Working Group, as a contribution to the Semantic Web suite of technologies at the World Wide Web Consortium. The specifications define a data model along with a number of serializations for representing aspects of provenance. The term provenance, as understood in these specifications, refers to information about entities, activities, and people involved in producing a piece of data or thing, which can be used to form assessments about its quality, reliability, or trustworthiness (PROV-Overview [ 1]). The specifications include a combination of W3C Recommendation and Note documents. Recommendation documents include:
  1. (i)

    The main PROV data model specification (PROV-DM [2]), with an associated set of constraints and inference rules (PROV-CONSTRAINTS [3])

     
  2. (ii)

    An OWL ontology that allows a mapping of the data model to RDF (PROV-O [4])

     
  3. (iii)

    A notation for PROV with a...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Groth P, Moreau L. PROV-Overview: an overview of the PROV Family of Documents [Internet]. 2012. Available from: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-overview/
  2. 2.
    Moreau L, Missier P, Belhajjame K, B’Far R, Cheney J, Coppens S, et al. PROV-DM: the PROV Data Model [Internet]. In: Moreau L, Missier P, editors. 2012. Available from: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/
  3. 3.
    Cheney J, Missier P, Moreau L. Constraints of the provenance data model [Internet]. 2012. Available from: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-constraints/
  4. 4.
    Lebo T, Sahoo S, McGuinness D, Belhajjame K, Cheney J, Corsar D, et al. PROV-O: the PROV ontology [Internet]. In: Lebo T, Sahoo S, McGuinness D, editors. 2012. Available from: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/
  5. 5.
    Moreau L, Missier P, Cheney J, Soiland-Reyes S. PROV-N: the provenance notation [Internet]. In: Moreau L, Missier P, editors. 2012. Available from: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-n/
  6. 6.
    Moreau L, Clifford B, Freire J, Futrelle J, Gil Y, Groth P, et al. The open provenance model – core specification (v1.1). Futur Gener Comput Syst Elsevier. 2011;7(21):743–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moreau L, Ludäscher B, Altintas I, Barga RS. The first provenance challenge. Concurr Comput Pract Exp [Internet]. 2008;20:409–18. Available from: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/116837632/abstract
  8. 8.
    Gil Y, Miles S, Belhajjame K, Deus H, Garijo D, Klyne G, et al. PROV model primer [Internet]. In: Gil Y, Miles S, editors. 2012. Available from: http://www.w3.org/TR/prov-primer/
  9. 9.
    Moreau L. The foundations for provenance on the web. Found Trends Web Sci [Internet]. Citeseer; 2009 [cited 2011 Oct 18];131. Available from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.155.784&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  10. 10.
    Moreau L, Groth P. Provenance: an introduction to PROV. Synth Lect Semant Web Theory Technol [Internet]. Morgan & Claypool Publishers; 2013 Sep 15 [cited 2014 Aug 25];3(4):10–129. Available from: http://www.morganclaypool.com/doi/abs/10.2200/S00528ED1V01Y201308WBE007
  11. 11.
    Cheney J, Chiticariu L, Tan W-C. Provenance in databases: why, how, and where. Found Trends{\textregistered} Databases. 2009;1:379–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Missier P, Belhajjame K, Cheney J. The W3C PROV family of specifications for modelling provenance metadata. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Extending Database Technology (Tutorial) [Internet]. 2013. Available from: http://www.edbt.org/Proceedings/2013-Genova/papers/edbt/a80-missier.pdf
  13. 13.
    Bowers S. Scientific workflow, provenance, and data modeling challenges and approaches. J Data Semant [Internet]. 2012 Apr 11 [cited 2013 Jun 8];1(1):19–30. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13740-012-0004-y
  14. 14.
    Missier P, Woodman S, Hiden H, Watson P. Provenance and data differencing for workflow reproducibility analysis. Concurr Comput Pract Exp [Internet]. 2013;n/a–n/a. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.3035
  15. 15.
    Peng R. Reproducible research in computational science. Science. 2011;334(6060):1226–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computing ScienceNewcastle UniversityNewcastle upon TyneUK

Section editors and affiliations

  • Juliana Freire
    • 1
  1. 1.University of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA