Gap analysis

This is the page for the gap analysis.

Tacit knowledge "FAIRification and opening of low carbon energy research data"

Consortium members can add any time, they feel that something is important to note even though it is not mentioned in a standard deliverable. In other words, this page collects uncodified, tacit knowledge. It will help us later to compile suggestions and lessons learned. This kind of knowledge is collected two-fold:

1. Anytime if someone feels that this should be noted. Please write down: Issue, Date, Author (could also be "anonymous"), the issue described in a few words or maximal lines>
2. During the final day of workshops

Learning process:

• People are hesitant to adopt new IT technologies, this is even the case among researchers heavily relying on data, algorithms and collaborative online software (e.g., R, platforms, online conferencing, HPC, ...). The effort to encourage change is not to underestimate. Reasons are several, notably, lack of time and uncertainty about potential benefit as well as overall risk aversion preferences. EERAdata is using the online software "Only Office" to facilitate collaboration (in particular also during the Covid-19 period).

FAIR and open criteria:

• Consortium members have a fair understanding of what FAIR/O is, but there is little knowledge and/or technical experience on how to approach the FAIRification and opening. All, however, share the view that we are at a critical point in time, where we need to implement these criteria. 
• To deepen knowledge about FAIR/O criteria, it is useful to test the criteria on a database one is familiar with. For this purpose (and to start brainstorming about the platform), AIT has developed a questionnaire for application in the use cases.

Metadata:

• A good starting point is to think about metadata and to look into existing metadata concepts in one's field. The first step is to understand that also metadata need to adhere to the FAIR/O principles.
• The next step is to increase knowledge on IT specific terms, i.e. to understand what the difference is between different metadata frameworks (taxonomy, thesaurus, ontology) as well as classification of metadata (high-level, medium-level, low-level OR administrative, structural and descriptive metadata).  WP 2 being in charge of aligning approaches between use cases, participates in all use case kickoffs to bring everybody on the same page. The presentation is linked with "metadata frameworks".
• It is useful to supply consortium members with read aheads and watch aheads on metadata to prepare the first EERAdata workshop. The workshop starts applications and discussions in the use cases break out sessions (and bringing insights back to the plenary), using selected databases.

FAIR Guiding Principles

This table shows the FAIR guiding principles described by Wilkinson et al., 2016.

To be Findable	F1. (meta)data are assigned a globally unique and persistent identifier F2. data are described with rich metadata (defined by R1 below) F3. metadata clearly and explicitly include the identifier of the data it describes F4. (meta)data are registered or indexed in a searchable resource
To be Accessible	A1. (meta)data are retrievable by their identifier using a standardized communications protocol A1.1 the protocol is open, free, and universally implementable A1.2 the protocol allows for an authentication and authorization procedure, where necessary A2. metadata are accessible, even when the data are no longer available
To be Interoperable	I1. (meta)data use a formal, accessible, shared, and broadly applicable language for knowledge representation. I2. (meta)data use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles I3. (meta)data include qualified references to other (meta)data
To be Reusable	R1. meta(data) are richly described with a plurality of accurate and relevant attributes R1.1. (meta)data are released with a clear and accessible data usage license R1.2. (meta)data are associated with detailed provenance R1.3. (meta)data meet domain-relevant community standards

Identified gaps after Workshop 1 (02/06/2020 – 04/06/2020)

This table shows a summary of the specific issues that were identified in Workshop 1. The aim was to categorise different issues to get a better understanding of how to tackle these challenges.

FAIR/O	Specific FAIR/O	Gaps	Gaps for energy domain	Use case specific gaps	Consequences for researchers
F	F2	Metadata scope	Different fields require different metadata (potentially very specific)	UC3: lack of additional metadata for applications of materials	Data are less useful for the specific field
F	F1/F3	Identifiers	Missing identifiers on websites Identifier not in downloaded data files		Makes research more difficult.
I	I2	Taxonomy/ontology/common vocabulary and language issues	Lack of standardisation Heterogeneous data makes standardisation hard No vocabulary documentation on websites Words used for same term in other languages may differ Databases in other languages than English		Research costs more time
I	I3	References to other (meta)data	No linking to source documents and related publications (for contextual knowledge) Possible need for links to other fields	UC3: link between microscopic and macroscopic materials (e.g., turbine blades)	Data cannot be connected to the source Makes research more difficult.
R	R1.1	Licensing	No licenses available may mean the data is not reusable for the researcher Licenses not clear and accessible Obtaining licenses may result in more effort and costs		Data potentially not reusable
R	R1.2	Reliability and provenance of data	When the data is collected from different and high number of sources, its reliability decreases		Data potentially not reusable
O		Privacy concerns and expected disadvantages	Not publishing data due to privacy concerns (sensitive data)	UC2: In case of distribution network data this is relevant	Data not accessible
Other		Conducting FAIR assessments	No qualitative assessment of the data itself (which may be limited) Discrepancies between results conducted by humans versus machines Sometimes not even DC standards are met Metadata is not updated Lacking encryption of websites (https) Problems assessing whether metadata will be available after data is unavailable Interface design/layout may be unclear, incomplete or not intuitive for humans Authentication details (user registration login / good or bad, clarify)	UC1 lack of data availability for time-series	Assessment is uncertain (human assessment may need more clarification and understanding) Makes research more time-intensive

Dublin Core

The DCMI Metadata Terms lists the current set of the Dublin Core vocabulary. Source: Dublin Core Metadata Initiative

1	abstract	11	contributor	21	extent	31	isReplacedBy	41	publisher	51	tableOfContents
2	accessRights	12	coverage	22	format	32	isRequiredBy	42	references	52	temporal
3	accrualMethod	13	created	23	hasFormat	33	issued	43	relation	53	title
4	accrualPeriodicity	14	creator	24	hasPart	34	isVersionOf	44	replaces	54	type
5	accrualPolicy	15	date	25	hasVersion	35	language	45	requires	55	valid
6	alternative	16	dateAccepted	26	identifier	36	license	46	rights
7	audience	17	dateCopyrighted	27	instructionalMethod	37	mediator	47	rightsHolder
8	available	18	dateSubmitted	28	isFormatOf	38	medium	48	source
9	bibliographicCitation	19	description	29	isPartOf	39	modified	49	spatial
10	conformsTo	20	educationLevel	30	isReferencedBy	40	provenance	50	subject

Category Types:

• Administrative metadata: who collected, when collected, where etc.
• Descriptive metadata: what is described by the data
• Structural metadata: organization of data, file formats

Simple Dublin core. 15 DC elements with their (shortened) official definitions and suggested interpretations for audiovisual contexts. Source: IASA

DC element name	DC definition	Energy domain interpretation	Example	Category
Title	A name given to the resource			Descriptive
Subject	The topic of the resource			Descriptive
Description	An account of the resource			Descriptive
Creator	An entity primarily responsible for making the resource			Administrative
Publisher	An entity responsible for making the resource available			Administrative
Contributor	An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource			Administrative
Date	A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource		e.g. energy consumption in 2016	Administrative (?)
Type	The nature or genre of the resource			Descriptive
Format	The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource			Structural
Identifier	An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context			Structural
Source	A related resource from which the described resource is derived			Descriptive
Language	A language of the resource		e.g. eng, ger, ita	Descriptive
Relation	A related resource			Descriptive
Coverage	The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant			Descriptive
Rights	Information about rights held in and over the resource			Administrative

Non-DC elements

Non-DC element name	Definition	Energy domain interpretation	Example	Category
Number of users		Is there any information on the number of accesses or users		Impact/Exploitation
Number of scientific publications where data is cited/used		Is there any information on the number of citations/uses		Impact/Exploitation
Curation activities (is the versioning ongoing)	Update, maintainance			Impact/Exploitation

Attempting to put a value on Impact/Exploitation:

• ENTSO-E: Found 172 results in Advanced Search (ALL) in Web of Science (WoSc) (16/06/2020). Citations of all these search result add up to 714. This however does not mean, that all search results really explicitly used data from ENTSO-E. Some (for sure, for some were found) only mentioned it saying they adoped workflow etc. from the site.
• SMARD: Found 82 results in Advanced Search (ALL=(SMARD)) in Web of Science (WoSc) (16/06/2020). However: SMARD is also an acronym for Spinal muscular atrophy with respiratory distress (SMARD). This somewhat complicates results and needs some further discussion. All 82 search results accumumlated 2359 citations themselves.

Additional Elements for Energy Domain (Proposal from August)

Date of availability	Since wenn is the database available
Information on the number of user	(if yes add the number otherwise no)
Number of scientific publications where data is cited/mentioned	Check "web of science"
Curation activities	Is there versioning and on-going development