Search for: All records

Data curation is the process of making a dataset fit-for-use and archivable. It is critical to data-intensive science because it makes complex data pipelines possible, studies reproducible, and data reusable. Yet the complexities of the hands-on, technical, and intellectual work of data curation is frequently overlooked or downplayed. Obscuring the work of data curation not only renders the labor and contributions of data curators invisible but also hides the impact that curators' work has on the later usability, reliability, and reproducibility of data. To better understand the work and impact of data curation, we conducted a close examination of data curation at a large social science data repository, the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). We asked: What does curatorial work entail at ICPSR, and what work is more or less visible to different stakeholders and in different contexts? And, how is that curatorial work coordinated across the organization? We triangulated accounts of data curation from interviews and records of curation in Jira tickets to develop a rich and detailed account of curatorial work. While we identified numerous curatorial actions performed by ICPSR curators, we also found that curators rely on a number of craft practices to perform their jobs. The reality of their work practices defies the rote sequence of events implied by many life cycle or workflow models. Further, we show that craft practices are needed to enact data curation best practices and standards. The craft that goes into data curation is often invisible to end users, but it is well recognized by ICPSR curators and their supervisors. Explicitly acknowledging and supporting data curators as craftspeople is important in creating sustainable and successful curatorial infrastructures. 

This paper describes a machine learning approach for annotating and analyzing data curation work logs at ICPSR, a large social sciences data archive. The systems we studied track curation work and coordinate team decision-making at ICPSR. Archive staff use these systems to organize, prioritize, and document curation work done on datasets, making them promising resources for studying curation work and its impact on data reuse, especially in combination with data usage analytics. A key challenge, however, is classifying similar activities so that they can be measured and associated with impact metrics. This paper contributes: 1) a set of data curation activities; 2) a computational model for identifying curation actions in work log descriptions; and 3) an analysis of frequent data curation activities at ICPSR over time. We first propose a set of data curation actions to help us analyze the impact of curation work. We then use this set to annotate a set of data curation logs, which contain records of data transformations and project management decisions completed by archive staff. Finally, we train a text classifier to detect the frequency of curation actions in a large set of work logs. Our approach supports the analysis of curation work documented in work log systems as an important step toward studying the relationship between research data curation and data reuse. 

The institutional review of interdisciplinary bodies of research lacks methods to systematically produce higher-level abstractions. Abstraction methods, like the “distant reading” of corpora, are increasingly important for knowledge discovery in the sciences and humanities. We demonstrate how abstraction methods complement the metrics on which research reviews currently rely. We model cross-disciplinary topics of research publications and projects emerging at multiple levels of detail in the context of an institutional review of the Earth Research Institute (ERI) at the University of California at Santa Barbara. From these, we design science maps that reveal the latent thematic structure of ERI's interdisciplinary research and enable reviewers to “read” a body of research at multiple levels of detail. We find that our approach provides decision support and reveals trends that strengthen the institutional review process by exposing regions of thematic expertise, distributions and clusters of work, and the evolution of these aspects.