Conference Agenda (All times are shown in Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) unless otherwise noted)

The goals of open science are driven by policies requiring data management, sharing, and accessibility. One way of measuring the impact of open science policies on scientific knowledge is to access data that has been prepared for re-use. But how accessible/available are data resources? In this paper, we discuss a method for exploring and locating datasets made available by scientists from federally funded projects in the US. The data pathways method was tested on federal awards. Here we describe the method and the results from analyzing fifty federal awards granted by the National Science Foundation to pursue data resources and their availability in publications, data repositories, or institutional repositories. The data pathways approach contributes to the development of a practical approach on availability that captures the current ways in which data are accessible from federally funded science projects –ranging from institutional repositories, journal data deposit, PI and project web pages, and science data platforms, among other found possibilities. This paper discusses some background and motivations for such a method, the method, research design, barriers encountered when searching for data resources from projects, and how this method can be useful to future studies of data availability.

Data users need relevant context and research expertise to effectively search for and identify relevant datasets. Leading data providers, such as the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR), offer standardized metadata and search tools to support data search. Metadata standards emphasize the machine-readability of data and its documentation. There are opportunities to enhance dataset search by improving users’ ability to learn about, and make sense of, information about data. Prior research has shown that context and expertise are two main barriers users face in effectively searching for, evaluating, and deciding whether to reuse data. In this paper, we propose a novel chatbot-based search system, DataChat, that leverages a graph database and a large language model to provide novel ways for users to interact with and search for research data. DataChat complements data archives’ and institutional repositories’ ongoing efforts to curate, preserve, and share research data for reuse by making it easier for users to explore and learn about available research data.

This paper explores sociotechnical perceptions of formats as they relate to work in the recovery and reuse of scientific data from historical, archival, and defunct data sources. The paper utilizes data gathered from 23 qualitative interviews with practitioners involved in various processes within scientific data curation lifecycles, ranging from marine biologists to data librarians. This paper focuses on how these practitioners understand, engage with, and utilize formats within their data curation work. Additionally, this paper enumerates the formats present throughout the scientific data curation process during the creation, preservation, curation, and redistribution of data. The paper explores how practitioners creating and curating scientific data encounter, make sense of, and utilize formats by identifying format types and their functions. Specifically, the paper focuses on practitioner perceptions concerning formats around the following themes: how practitioners' historical relationships to challenging formats inform their ongoing work with format-based curation, the importance of contexts in prioritizing or ignoring formats within scientific curation work, and how formats reveal more significant sociotechnical issues within the curation of science. The paper concludes by exploring practical and theoretical implications for navigating formats within the recovery and reuse of scientific data and offers suggestions on reconfiguring formats within data curation.

This paper aims to investigate the Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification (TRAC) process by examining the communication practices and risk communication dynamics among auditors during the audit. Through an in-depth, qualitative analysis of the audit process and the interactions between auditors, this paper provides valuable insights into the importance of diverse backgrounds, effective communication, and consensus building in the assessment of TRAC checklist requirements. Furthermore, the paper highlights potential areas of improvement within the audit process, addressing concerns related to disagreements, reliance on leadership, and the comprehensiveness of risk identification and communication.