Digital resources in the Social Sciences and Humanities OpenEdition Our platforms OpenEdition Books OpenEdition Journals Hypotheses Calenda Libraries OpenEdition Freemium Follow us

The Initiative for Open Abstracts is launched

OpenCitations is proud to be part of the launch of the Initiative for Open Abstracts, a new cross-publisher initiative calling for the unrestricted availability of abstracts to boost the discovery of research.

The Initiative for Open Abstracts (I4OA), launched on September 24th, calls on all scholarly publishers to open their abstracts, and specifically to deposit them with Crossref, in order to facilitate large-scale access and promote discovery of critical research.

Making abstracts openly available helps scholarly publishers to maximize the visibility and reach of their journals and books. Open abstracts make it easier for scholars to discover, read and then cite these publications; promotes their inclusion in systematic reviews; expands and simplifies the use of text mining, natural language processing and artificial intelligence techniques in bibliometric analyses; and facilitates scholarship across all disciplines by those without subscription access to commercial bibliographic services.

Many abstracts are already available in various bibliographic databases, but these sources have limitations, for example because they require a subscription, are not machine-accessible, or are restricted to a specific discipline. I4OA thus calls on all scholarly publishers using Crossref DOIs to make their abstracts openly available by depositing them with Crossref. This can be done as part of established workflows that publishers already have in place for submitting publication metadata to Crossref.

As detailed on the I4OA web site at https://i4oa.org, 40 publishers have already agreed to support I4OA and to make their abstracts openly available. I4OA is also supported by 56 other stakeholders including research funders, libraries and library associations, infrastructure providers, and open science organizations, demonstrating the importance and relevance of this Initiative to the scholarly community. The launch press release is available at https://i4oa.org/press.html#pressrelease.

I4OA was inspired by the success of the Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC, https://i4oc.org/), which encourages the submission of references to Crossref. Since the launch of I4OC in 2017, over two thousand scholarly publishers have chosen to make the reference lists of their journal articles and book chapters openly available through Crossref. I4OA aims to replicate the success of I4OC by achieving a rapid jump in the open availability of scholarly abstracts via Crossref.

Further information may be obtained from the I4OA web site at https://i4oa.org, from the I4OA poster at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4047454, by attending the free I4OA launch webinar on October 5th 2020 at 4 pm CEST (register at https://tinyurl.com/i4oa-webinar), by emailing Professor Ludo Waltman (CWTS, Leiden University; coordinator of I4OA) at openabstracts@gmail.com, or by following @open_abstracts on Twitter.

OpenCitations selected for SCOSS second funding cycle

The Global Sustainability Coalition for Open Science Services (SCOSS) is launching its second funding cycle, and OpenCitations is one of three open science infrastructure organizations whose services have been evaluated and selected for presentation to the international scholarly community for crowd-sourced sustainability funding, along with the Public Knowledge Project (PKP) and the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB).

OpenCitations is an innovative infrastructure organization for open scholarship dedicated to the publication of open bibliographic and citation data concerning academic publications as Linked Open Data using Semantic Web technologies, thereby providing a disruptive alternative to traditional proprietary citation indexes. It also undertakes related advocacy work, particularly as a founding member of the Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC).

OpenCitations developed the OpenCitations Corpus (OCC), a database of open downloadable bibliographic and citation data recorded in RDF and released under a Creative Commons CC0 public domain waiver, which currently contains information about 14 million citation links to over 7.5 million cited resources. In addition and separately, OpenCitations is currently developing a number of Open Citation Indexes, using the data openly available in third-party bibliographic databases. The first and largest of these is COCI, the OpenCitations Index of Crossref open DOI-to-DOI citations, which presently contains information encoded in RDF on more than 445 million citations, released under a CC0 waiver.

OpenCitations structures its data according to the OpenCitations Data Model (OCDM), that may also be employed by third parties, either for their own use or to structure their data for submission to and publication by OpenCitations. This model uses OpenCitations’ suite of SPAR (Semantic Publishing and Referencing) Ontologies developed to describe all aspects of the scholarly publishing domain. OpenCitations has also published open software of generic applicability for searching, browsing and providing REST APIs over RDF triplestores.

OpenCitations fully supports the founding principles of Open Science. It complies with the FAIR data principles proposed by Force11 that data should be findable, accessible, interoperable and re-usable, and it complies with the recommendations of I4OC that citation data, in particular, should be structured, separable and open. OpenCitations has published a formal definition of an open citation, and has launched a system for globally unique and persistent identifiers (PIDs) for bibliographic citations – the Open Citation Identifiers (OCIs) – for which it maintains an OCI resolution service.

OpenCitations has the potential to be a game-changer in the scholarly information landscape, giving institutions and individuals the ability to analyse and reuse publication citations in other infrastructures, in library collections, and in research. Open citation data are particularly valuable for bibliometric analysis, increasing the reproducibility of large-scale analyses by enabling the publication of the source data upon which analytical results are based. Since citation data are also crucial to evaluating research performance, such access to open, transparent citation data sources is a priority for Open Science.

SCOSS was formed in early 2017 with the purpose of providing a new coordinated and targeted crowd-sourcing and cost-sharing framework to enable the Open Access and Open Science communities to support the open infrastructure services on which they depend. In its first funding cycle, more than 1.5 million euros was pledged by more than 200 institutions worldwide to help fund and sustain the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and SHERPA/RoMEO.

With the launch of its second funding cycle, SCOSS is appealing to academic institutions and their libraries, research institutes, publishers, funding organisations, national and regional governments, international organisations, learned societies and service providers worldwide —  everyone who is invested in Open Access and Open Science — to support one or more of these three new selected open infrastructure services through a three-year commitment.

For more details about the services, suggested funding levels, and how you can help support OpenCitations, please see https://sparceurope.org/download/7913/ or contact us at donations@opencitations.net.

Early adopters of the OpenCitations Data Model

OpenCitations is very pleased to announce its collaboration with four new scholarly Research and Development projects that are early adopters of the recently updated OpenCitations Data Model, described in this blog post.

The four projects are similar, in that they each are independently using text mining and optical character recognition or PDF extraction techniques to extract citation information from the reference lists of published works, and are making these citations available as Linked Open Data. Three of the four will also use the OpenCitations Corpus as publication platform for their citation data.  The academic disciplines from which these citation data are being extracted are social science, humanities and economics.

1     Linked Open Citation Database (LOC-DB)

The Linked Open Citation Database, with partners in Mannheim, Stuttgart, Kiel, and Kaiserslautern (LOC-DB, https://locdb.bib.uni-mannheim.de/blog/en/), is the first of two German projects funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) that are extracting citations from Social Science publications.  Dr. Annette Klein, Deputy Director of the Mannheim University Library, is the project manager.

The project is using Deep Neural Networks based approaches for reference detection and state-of-the-art methods for information extraction and semantic labelling of reference lists from electronic and print media with arbitrary layouts [3].  The raw data obtained will be manually checked against and linked with existing bibliographic metadata sources in an editorial system.  They will then be structured in RDF using the OpenCitations Data Model, and published in the Linked Open Citations Database under a CC0 waiver. Using its libraries’ own Social Science print holdings and licensed electronic journals as subject material, this project will demonstrate how these citation extraction processes can be applied to the holdings of individual academic libraries, and can be integrated with library catalogues [1, 2, 3].

References

[1]       Kai Eckert, Anne Lauscher and Akansha Bhardwaj (2017) LOC-DB: A Linked Open Citation Database provided by Libraries. Motivation and Challenges.  EXCITE Workshop 2017: “Challenges in Extracting and Managing References”.  https://locdb.bib.uni-mannheim.de/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/LOC-DB@EXCITE.pdf

[2]      Lauscher, Anne; Eckert, Kai; Galke, Lukas; Scherp, Ansgar; Rizvi, Syed Tahseen Raza; Ahmed, Sheraz; Dengel, Andreas; Zumstein, Philipp; Klein, Annette  (2018) Linked Open Citation Database: Enabling libraries to contribute to an open and interconnected citation graph. Accepted for the JCDL 2018: Joint Conference on Digital Libraries 2018, June 3-6, 2018 in Fort Worth, Texas [Preprint of the conference publication].
https://locdb.bib.uni-mannheim.de/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/LOCDB-JCDL2018-paper-camera-ready.pdf

[3]       Bhardwaj A., Mercier D., Dengel A., Ahmed S. (2017). DeepBIBX: deep learning for image based bibliographic data extraction. In: Liu D., Xie S., Li Y., Zhao D., El-Alfy ES. (eds) Neural Information Processing. ICONIP 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 10635. Springer, Cham [Conference publication].

2     The EXCITE (Extraction of Citations from PDF Documents) Project

The EXCITE Project (http://west.uni-koblenz.de/en/research/excite/), run jointly at the University of Koblenz-Landau and GESIS (Leibniz Institute for Social Sciences), is the second project funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) that is extracting citations from Social Science publications.  It is headed by Steffen Staab, head of the Institute for Web Science and Technologies at the University of Koblenz-Landau, and Philipp Mayr of GESIS.

Since the social sciences are given only marginal coverage in the main bibliographic databases, this project aims to make more citation data available to researchers, with a particular focus on the German language social sciences.  It has developed a set of algorithms for the extraction of reference information from PDF documents and for matching the reference entry strings thus obtained against bibliographic databases (see EXCITE git https://github.com/exciteproject/).  It is using as its data sources the following Social Science collections: full texts from SSOAR, the Gesis Social Science Open Access Repository (https://www.gesis.org/ssoar/home/) and scattered pdf stocks from other social science collections including SOLIS, Springer Online Journals and CSA Sociological Abstracts [4, 5].

The EXCITE project organized an international developer and researcher workshop “Challenges in Extracting and Managing References” in March 2017 in Cologne. http://west.uni-koblenz.de/en/research/excite/workshop-2017

EXCITE will then structure the extracted bibliographic and citation data in RDF using the OpenCitations Data Model, and will use the OpenCitations Corpus as its publication platform, employing the OCC EXCITE supplier prefix 0110, described here, to identify the provenance of these citations.

References

[4]       Martin Körner (2016). Extraction from social science research papers using conditional random fields and distant supervision, Master’s Thesis, University of Koblenz-Landau, 2016.

[5]       Körner, M., Ghavimi, B., Mayr, P., Hartmann, H., & Staab, S. (2017). Evaluating reference string extraction using line-based conditional random fields: a case study with german language publications. In M. Kirikova, K. Nørvåg, G. A. Papadopoulos, J. Gamper, R. Wrembel, J. Darmont, & S. Rizzi (Hrsg.), New Trends in Databases and Information Systems (Bd. 767, S. 137–145). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67162-8_15   Preprint: https://philippmayr.github.io/papers/Koerner-et-al2017.pdf

3    The Venice Scholar Index

The Venice Scholar Index is a citation index of literature on the history of Venice, indexing nearly 3000 volumes of scholarship from the mid 19th century to 2013, from which some 4 million bibliographic references have been extracted.

The Venice Scholar Index is the first prototype resulting from Linked Books Project (https://dhlab.epfl.ch/page-127959-en.html), a project spearheaded by Giovanni Colavizza and Matteo Romanello of the Digital Humanities Laboratory at EPFL (École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne), with partners in Venice, Milan and Rome.

The project is exploring the history of Venice through references to scholarly literature as well as archival documents found within publications.  To achieve this goal, the project has developed a system to automatically extract bibliographic references found within a large set of digitized books and journals, which has then been applied to the publications on the history of Venice, its main use case [6].

The Linked Books Project is specifically interested in analysing the interplay between citations to primary (e.g. archival) documents and those to secondary sources (scholarly literature), and the citation profiles of publications through time.  To this end, it developed the Venice Scholar Index, a rich search interface to navigate through the resulting network of citations, with the final aim of interlinking digital archives and digital libraries.

The citation data underlying the Venice Scholar Index are modelled using the OpenCitations Data Model, and will use the OpenCitations Corpus as its publication platform, using the OCC Venice Scholar Index supplier prefix 0120 to identify the provenance of these citations.

Reference

[6] Giovanni Colavizza, Matteo Romanello, and Frédéric Kaplan (2017). The references of references: a method to enrich humanities library catalogs with citation data. In International Journal on Digital Libraries 18 (March 8, 2017): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-017-0210-1.

4    CitEcCyr – Citations in Economics published in CyrillicCitEcCyr  (https://github.com/citeccyr/CitEcCyr) is an open repository of citation relationships obtained from research papers in the Russian language and Cyrillic script from Socionet (https://socionet.ru/) and RePEc (http://repec.org/) [7, 8].  The CitEcCyr project is headed by Oxana Medvedeva, is technically led by Sergey Parinov, and is funded by RANEPA (http://www.ranepa.ru/eng/), the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public. CitEcCyr is also developing a suite of open software for the citation content analysis of these papers.  This project intends to model its citations using the OpenCitations Data Model, and will use the OpenCitations Corpus as its publication platform, using the OCC CitEcCyr supplier prefix 0140 to identify the provenance of these citations.

However, since this is the first project from which OpenCitations will be importing bibliographic metadata and citations in a language other than English and in a script other than the Latin script, we at OpenCitations are going to have to crawl out of our comfortable ‘Western’ shells and learn to handle foreign languages and scripts other than Latin scripts.

For Russian language papers written using Cyrillic script, we at OpenCitations will to decide how best to handle Russian language written using Cyrillic script, Cyrillic script transliterated into Latin script, and Russian language translated into English and rendered using Latin script.  In particular, since in the OpenCitations Corpus our reference entry records are the uncorrected literal texts of the references in the reference lists of the citing papers, these will need to be recorded as given in Cyrillic.

We will need to develop a policy for when to provide Latin script translations of (for example) titles and abstracts, if these are not provided by the data supplier.  To facilitate use of the OpenCitations Corpus by Russian scholars, we will also need to modify the OpenCitations web site, so as to render the static information displayed in the web pages in the language and script appropriate to the language setting on the user’s web browser.

Unfortunately, all this will take time, so we do not anticipate publishing citation data from the CitEcCyr project within OCC any time soon.  However, this collaboration will be of tremendous value to OpenCitations as well as to CitEcCyr, since the lessons learned by our collaboration with the CitEcCyr project will enable the OpenCitations Corpus to handle citation data not just in Russian, but also in Arabic, Chinese, Japanese and other languages where the Latin script is not used, something that is not found in other major bibliographic databases.

Watch this space!

References

[7]       Jose Manuel Barrueco, Thomas Krichel, Sergey Parinov, Victor Lyapunov, Oxana Medvedeva and Varvara Sergeeva (2017).  Towards open data for the citation content analysis.    https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.00302

[8]       Thomas Krichel (2017). CitEc to CitEcCyr – A stab at distributed citation systems.  Presented at the 2017 EXCITE workshop. http://west.uni-koblenz.de/sites/default/files/research/projects/excite/workshop-2017/slides/excite-workshop-2017_krichel_citec-to-citeccyr.pdf

Oxford University Press opens its references!

Good news!  Today, on January 16th 2018, Oxford University Press (OUP) announced its participation in the Initiative for Open Citations, and requested Crossref to turn on reference sharing for all OUP deposited references from more than half a million publications.  Oxford University Press is the largest university press in the world, publishing in 70 languages and 190 countries.

OUP logo

Their announcement is at https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/announcements_from_oup/oup_joins_I4OC.

OUP now joins the elite band of four university presses that have already made their references open at Crossref in response to the I4OC call (https://i4oc.org/#publishers).

This decision by OUP has been a long time in gestation – see my 2012 post Oxford University Press to support Open Citations – but is no less welcome for that!

Three publications describing the Open Citations Corpus

Last September, I attended the Fifth Annual Conference on Open Access Scholarly Publishing, held in Riga, at which I had been invited to give a paper entitled The Open Citations Corpus – freeing scholarly citation data.  A recording of my talk is available here, and my PowerPoint presentation is separately available here.  My own reflections on the major themes of the conference are given in a separate Semantic Publishing Blog post.

While in Riga preparing to give that talk about the importance of open citation data, I received an invitation from Sara Abdulla, Chief Commissioning Editor at Nature, to write a Comment piece for their forthcoming special issue on Impact.  My immediate reaction was that this should be on the same theme, an idea to which Sara readily agreed.  The deadline for delivery of the article was 10 days later!

As soon as the Riga conference was over, I first assembled all the material I had to hand that could be relevant to describing the Open Citations Corpus (OCC) in the context of conventional access to academic citation data from commercial sources.  That gave me a raw manuscript of some five thousand words, from which I had to distil an article of less than 1,300 words.  I then started editing, and asked my colleagues Silvio Peroni and Tanya Gray for their comments.

The end result, enriched by some imaginative art work by the Nature team, was published a couple of weeks later on 16th October [1], and presents both the intellectual argument for open citation data, and the practical obstacles to be overcome in achieving the goal of a substantial corpus of such data, as well as giving a general description of the Open Citations Corpus itself and of the development work we have planned for it.

Because of the drastic editing required to reduce the original draft to about a quarter of its size, all material not crucial to the central theme had to be cut.  I thus had the idea of developing the original draft subsequently into a full journal article that would include these additional themes, particularly Silvio’s work on the SPAR ontologies described in this Semantic Publishing Blog post [2], Tanya’s work on the CiTO Reference Annotation Tools described in this Semantic Publishing Blog post, and a wonderful analogy between the scholarly citation network and Venice devised by Silvio.  I also wanted to give authorship credit to Alex Dutton, who had undertaken almost all of the original software development work for the OCC.  For this reason, instead of assigning copyright to Nature for the Comment piece, I gave them a license to publish, retaining copyright to myself so I could re-use the text.  I am pleased to say that they accepted this without comment.

Silvio and I then set to work to develop the draft into a proper article.  The result was a ten-thousand word paper submitted to the Journal of Documentation a week before Christmas [3].  We await the referees’ comments!

 References

[1]     Shotton D. (2013).  Open citations.  Nature 502: 295–297. http://www.nature.com/news/publishing-open-citations-1.13937. doi:10.1038/502295a.

[2]     Peroni S and Shotton D (2012). FaBiO and CiTO: ontologies for describing bibliographic resources and citations. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web. 17: 33-34. doi:10.1016/j.websem.2012.08.001.

[3]    Silvio Peroni, Alexander Dutton, Tanya Gray, David Shotton (2015). Setting our bibliographic references free: towards open citation data. Journal of Documentation, 71 (2): 253-277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JD-12-2013-0166; OA at http://speroni.web.cs.unibo.it/publications/peroni-2015-setting-bibliographic-references.pdf

This is the main article about OpenCitations, which includes several background information and the main ideas and works supporting the whole project, the Corpus, and some possible future developments in terms of new kinds of data to be included, e.g. citation functions.

 

Open Citations – Indexing PubMed Central OA data

As part of our work on the Open Citations extensions project, I have recently been doing one of my favourite things – namely indexing large quantities of data then exploring it.

On this project we are interested in the PubMed Central Open Access subset, and more specifically, we are interested in what we can do with the citation data contained within the records that are in that subset – because, as they are open access, that citation data is public and freely available.

We are building a pipeline that will enable us to easily import data from the PMC OA and from other sources such as arXiv, so that we can do great things with it like explore it in a facetview, manage and edit it in a bibserver, visualise it, and stick it in the rather cool related-work prototype software. We are building on the earlier work of both the original Open Citations project, and of the Open Bibliography projects.

Work done so far

We have spent a few weeks getting to understand the original project software and clarifying some of the goals the project should achieve; we have put together a design for a processing pipeline to get the data from source right through to where we need it, in the shape that we need it. In the case of facetview / bibserver work, this means getting it into a wonderful elasticsearch index.

While Martyn continues work on the bits and pieces for managing the pipeline as a whole and pulling data from arXiv, I have built an automated and threadable toolchain for unpacking data out of the compressed file format it arrives in from the US National Institutes of Health, parsing the XML file format and converting it into BibJSON, and then bulk loading it into an elasticsearch index. This has gone quite well.

To fully browse what we have so far, check out http://occ.cottagelabs.com.

For the code: https://github.com/opencitations/OpenCitationsCorpus/tree/master/pipeline.

The indexing process

Whilst the toolchain is capable of running threaded, the server we are using only has 2 cores and I was not sure to what extent they would be utilised, so I ran the process singular. It took five hours and ten minutes to build an index of the PMC OA subset, and we now have over 500,000 records. We can full-text search them and facet browse them.

Some things of particular interest that I learnt – I have an article in the PMC OA! And also PMIDs are not always 8 digits long – they appear in fact to be incremental from 1.

What next

At the moment there is no effort made to create record objects for the citations we find within these records, however plugging that into the toolchain is relatively straightforward now.

The full pipeline is of course still in progress, and so this work will need a wee bit of wiring into it.

Improve parsing. There are probably improvements to the parsing that we can make too, and so one of the next tasks will be to look at a few choice records and decide how better to parse them. The best way to get a look at the records for now is to use a browser like Firefox or Chrome and install the JSONview plugin, then go to occ.cottagelabs.com and have a bit of a search, then click the small blue arrows at the start of a record you are interested in to see it in full JSON straight from the index. Some further analysis on a few of these records would be a great next step, and should allow for improvements to both the data we can parse and to our representation of it.

Finish visualisations. Now that we have a good test dataset to work with, the various bits and pieces of visualisation work will be pulled together and put up on display somewhere soon. These, in addition to the search functionality already available, will enable us to answer the questions set as representative of project goals earlier in January (thanks David for those).

Postscript

David Shotton writes: This productive collaboration between Cottage Labs and the Open Citations Corpus came to an end when Jisc funding ran out.  The corpus has more recently been given a new lease of life, as described here, with a new instantiation named OpenCitations hosted at the Department of Computer Science and Engineering of the University of Bologna, with Silvio Peroni as Co-Director.

Why openness benefits research

David writes: Dr Heinrich Hartman is a new colleague of mine, who, having been working in the Mathematical Institute of Oxford University, has just returned to Germany to start a new job in a leading semantic web research group, that of Steffan Staab at the Institute for Web Science and Technologies, University of Koblenz-Landau.  What follows are our thoughts about research openness, that relates to our decision, described in the next blog post, to merge our bibliographic citation projects.

The following text is jointly authored by David Shotton (david.shotton@zoo.ox.ac.uk) and Heinrich Hartmann (hartmann@uni-koblenz.de)

Transparency is essential for trust and credibility in the research community, and true openness brings great opportunities for academia. The internet facilitates the free flow of information and knowledge, and permits new forms of communication both for researchers and for the general public. Already, today’s children can listen freely on the internet to university courses taught by world-leading scientists, and everybody has the best encyclopaedia ever written (Wikipedia) at their fingertips.  These are real game changers. Opening up the research literature is the next logical step.

Open publishing

We believe that the current academic publishing model – whereby researchers give their content to commercial publishers and then buy it back from them at enormous cost by means of journal subscription fees – has become absurd, since it is no longer helping the researcher to distribute his or her findings, but rather prevents the work from being widely read, by hiding it behind subscription pay walls.  Would it not be much better to let this information flow freely, accessible to everybody who wants to read it!

Of course, such a vision of openness for academic publishing raises issues of finance and quality control – who will pay for open access publishing, and how can we ensure that scientific rigor accompanies open publication.  While the internet enables dissemination of information at a fraction of the cost of traditional print publication, publishing clearly involves more than electronic dissemination.  It is for this reason that we, with others, are presently planning a high level conference on modern scientific communication, entitled Rigor and Openness in 21st Century Science, to be held in Oxford next spring.

However, new publication funding models are being developed, particularly in the United Kingdom, where Research Councils UK and the Wellcome Trust are insisting that papers reporting research results obtained as a result of their research funding should be published under an open Creative Commons CC-By attribution licence when an article processing charge (APC) is levied, so that the works are freely available for text mining and re-use [1].  What is significant is that they are backing their words with funding to enable it.  Cameron Neylon has recently written a commentary in Nature about the importance of this [2].

Furthermore, peer review is being carefully examined by several forward-looking publishers to determine how well open alternatives to the present system of confidential review actually work.

The role of social media in science

Much academic research is done in relative isolation, because topics have become so specialized that there may be only a few experts in the whole world who really understand each particular research problem.  These experts may be located on different continents, and may not know about one another – a situation that is particularly true for Ph.D. students and other young researchers, who may not yet be familiar with the literature in their field, and who may have formed few personal relationships with colleagues in other institutions through attendance at research conferences.  New forms of academic social media can play a role here, to catalyse interactions between geographically separated academics, and many experiments in this area are being conducted.

Academic social media can also play an important role in filtering the wealth of new articles published every day, and in alerting people to the small fraction of these that are most relevant to them.  Typically, junior researchers rely on recommendations from friends and colleagues about which articles are worth reading, but if academic social media can be used to broaden this recommendation network, they will provide a significant service.

Fears and benefits of openness

Of course researchers, particularly early in their careers, are cautious about sharing their discoveries too early or too widely, for fear they may get ‘scooped’, since they naturally and quite properly wish to obtain credit for their own work by being the first to publish it.  However, what is often missed by people of this mind-set is that working openly with other people can have benefits too.  It can be a lot more fun, can lead to more sustainable motivation, can result in incredibly rapid collaborative progress, and hence can often lead to better results.  An essential pre-requisite for this is the willingness to share one’s ideas and making contact with like-mined people.  An example of a researcher who practices openness in his day-to-day research is Georgio Gilestro, Lecturer in Systems Neurobiology with the Department of Life Sciences at Imperial College London, who publishes his research group’s Open Lab Book online.

Our personal experience, not at least in the joint Open Citations and Related Work developments described in the next blog post, is that you gain more than you loose by being open!

Reference

[1]       Wellcome Trust announcement: Open access: CC-BY licence required for all articles which incur an open access publication fee – FAQ. Available from http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/stellent/groups/corporatesite/@policy_communications/documents/web_document/WTVM055715.pdf.

[2]       Cameron Neylon (2012). Science publishing: Open access must enable open use.  Nature 492: 348–349.  doi:10.1038/492348a.

Open letter to publishers

[The text of this post was updated on 27-09-2013 and 04-04-2017 to reflect a new CrossRef metadata best practice document and a change in their URI.]

Today I wrote an open letter to all scholarly journal publishers, available online here, entitled:

Open your article reference lists for inclusion in the Open Citations Corpus.

In this letter, I request that publishers open the bibliographic citation data in their journal article reference lists.  There is a growing movement to make such bibliographic citation data open – for example, Nature Publishing Group’s open Linked Data Platform now includes citation metadata for all published article references.

Provided a publisher is already depositing article references with CrossRef as part of the CrossRef CitedBy Linking service, all the publisher need to do is to inform CrossRef that it is willing for CrossRef to freely distribute these reference, for example in response to queries against the CrossRef XML API.  We will then harvest them from CrossRef and incorporate them as open linked data in the Open Citations Corpus.

Nature Publishing Group, Taylor & Francis, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (who publish Science) and Oxford University Press, as well as a number of open-access publishers, have already given their consent to CrossRef to do this for some or all of their journals.

If not already a subscriber to the CrossRef CitedBy Linking service, a publisher can register for this useful service free of charge.  Having done so, there is nothing further the publisher needs to do to ‘open’ its reference data, other than to give its consent to CrossRef.  This can be done automatically, in the submitted article metadata, or (for back numbers) by informing CrossRef directly.

Even Open Access publishers, publishing articles under a CC-By open license, need to give this specific permission to CrossRef for this to occur, because CrossRef policy is that all publishers, including open access publishers, have to opt in to any distribution of references that CrossRef makes.

For new submissions, publishers should follow instructions detailed in the CrossRef blog at https://www.crossref.org/blog/distributing-references-via-crossref/, which contains the following key instruction:

“In order for publishers to distribute references along with standard bibliographic metadata, publishers need to set the <reference_distribution_opt> metadata element to “any" for each DOI deposit where they want to make references openly available.”

In this way, publishers can choose to open the reference lists for all their journals, or to do so on a journal-by-journal or on an article-by-article basis (useful for ‘hybrid’ subscription-access journals in which only some articles are open access).

To open reference lists for back numbers, publisher needs to e-mail CrossRef to express their intent,using the template shown at the foot of this post, as detailed in my Open Letter to Publishers.

I have copied this open letter to the CEOs of the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), of the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP), and of the International Association of Scientific, Technical & Medical Publishers (STM), asking them to distribute it to their members, perhaps in association with their next Members News Letter, as CrossRef itself is planning to do later this month.

Please spread the word about this, particularly to publishers who may not be members of these professional associations.  Thanks.

= = =

Template for an e-mail to CrossRef expressing willingness to open reference lists in previously published and future journal articles.

To support@crossref.org

I am writing on behalf of *** [name of publisher] to confirm that *** [name of publisher] is willing for the bibliographic reference lists within the articles in [delete as necessary:] all our journals [or] the attached list of journals be made freely available by CrossRef, for inclusion in the Open Citations Corpus. These journals are associated with the following DOI prefix(es): 10.**** [Please complete DOI prefix(es) – see footnote].
Yours sincerely [name, position, date]
= = =
Footnote: Publisher’s DOI prefixes are listed at http://www.crossref.org/06members/50go-live.html by name of publisher.