Child pages
  • Institutional Bibliography
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

About this document

These are some initial thoughts about institutional bibliographies intended for those in the process of creating an institutional bibliographic service. As I've found  no extended comparison except this spreadsheet by Dorothea Salo, I gathered some details about a selection of IB applications (mainly from Germany). Feel free to correct/enhance this document especially the stub comparison of systems.

Introduction

Scientific publications play an essential part in the visualization of the output and ongoing research of a university or research institution. They form an integral part of the research itself and of the evaluation basis. They are one factor which determines the external and internal perception of a single researcher, a research unit and/or the university as a whole, in short:

  • representation of research output
  • visualization of research focuses, collaborations and networks
  • material for research and teaching
  • material for evaluation

Situation at Many Institutions

  •  publication management not a part of the IT infrastructure
  •  different individual solutions (author homepage, publication list/database of a department ..)
  •  low visibility and missing integration
  •  high costs/effort to aggregate data for different purposes (research report, grants, performance-based funding, ...)
  •  no institution wide visualization

Purpose of an Institutional Bibliography (IB)

The purpose of an IB is to offer a simple, web based, and flexible instrument to capture, proceed, use and disseminate bibliographic information.

The IB should increase the external and internal visibility of the research done. It should highlight research focuses and collaboration. Furthermore it should enable the flexible creation of views and aggregations/selections of the data gathered and thus serve as a tool for different requirements.

For the researcher the IB should be a universal instrument to represent his research, and manage, visualize and use
his bibliographic data and this at the lowest expense (data transfer from other sources) possible.

The data gathered in the IB can be used for internal evaluation and as an information source in the performance-based funding.
In short:

  • one-stop-shop for authors
  • representation of research output and research focus
  • visualization of collaborations and networks
  • reuse of data for a variety of use cases (CV, grants, performance-based funding ...)
  • base for evaluation and bibliometrics
  • promote open access

Requirements

Functional Requirements

Metadata Model and Ingest

The default metadata used should be based on metadata standards and at least differentiate between bibliographic and administrative metadata. The metadata should be configurable.

The ingest should be possible via:

  • UI (manual and import of a variety of import formats)
  • CLI
  • OAI-PMH harvest
  • inclusion of authority control

Processing, Workflows and Quality Management

If needed newly ingested data should be passed through a workflow. This should be configurable and/or determined by trustworthiness of the source of the data in order to minimize the efforts for quality management. The workflows should be configurable per set/collection or whatever the base container is called. Similar to the ingest process internal and external authority controls should be integrated.

Name disambiguation and duplicates control

As long as their is no universal name identification system, it should be possible to use an internal/external (like VNAF, PND, future ORCID) authority reference for name disambiguation associating all known pen names with one authority based name. Furthermore the system should flag possible duplicates during ingest and workflows.

Structure, Affiliations and Collaborations

  • handling of institutional affiliation of a researcher and his publications
    over time, emeritus status, temporal absence, multiple affiliations
  • managing of the changing institutional structure
  • joint institutes/groups/research units
  • personal and organizational collaborations

Use of the Data

Based on the data and the structure it is in,  it should be possible to create a variety of views. These views should be visualisable in a variety of styles, forms and formats. Examples for views:

  • all peer-reviewed publications by an author
  • all publications by a department in one year
  • all publications associated with a theme (tagging)
  • ...

Crossover to (Open Access) Repository

The bibliography should ease the publication of the full text in an institutional repository via a standard interface like SWORD. The system should facilitate the rights clearance necessary in this process via a Romeo/Sherpa interface and appropriate workflows.

Technical Requirements

The system should have a high degree of flexibility and interoperability and should provide the interfaces typical in the publication/bibliographic environment. It should offer a variety of import and export formats and a framework to create one's own formats. This is important to suit the heterogeneous and evolving requirements in the field of scientific publication (e.g. link primary data to publications). As sciences is global the system should be internationalized.

Sustainability and Interoperability

The system should be interoperable and integrate in the infrastructure of the institution (e.g. identity management). It should support established tools, work process of the institution and/or scientific community. The technical basis with regards to architecture, used components and provider should be sustainable. The system should provide an exit strategy in order to migrate it's content to other systems as requirements and techniques evolve.

Interfaces

The system should provide a variety of interfaces typical in the context of publication management:

  • COINS  (easy use of data in Zotero and Citave)
  • OAI-PMH
  • ROMEO/SHERPA
  • SWORD
  • OpenURL
  • ...

Existing solutions/tools

The terms institutional bibliography and publication management  are not clearly defined. There are transitions to catalogues, repositories, research informations systems, research management systems etc. Therefore a variety of different solutions/tools used exist. Types of tools used:

  • catalogues
  • collaboration and network tools
  • content management systems
  • publication management tools
  • repositories
  • research information systems

List of tools:

System comparison

General Information

System

Type

License/
Distribution

Provider

Tech used

Known Installations

Service Providers

Exit Strategy

Annotation

Bibapp

Publication Management
Bibliography

Open Source
Uol/NCSA License

Bibapp
University of Illinois
University of Wisconsin

Ruby on Rails,
Java, Lucene, Solr, MySQL v PostgreSQL

6

 

no

growing community

DSpace

Repository

Open Source
BSD compatible

Duraspace

Java, JSP v Cocoon, Lucene, Solr, PostgreSQL v Oracle, Ant, Maven

>1000

List of Service Providers

yes

well developed community

HSB

Repository

Open Source
MIT License

Ruhr-Universität Bochum

MODS, Jangle, Solr, Django, YAML

1

no

no

project of the RUB

PUB
Publister

CRIS
Repository

Open Source

UB Bielefeld

Perl, MySQL

3

no

no

no frontend, data must be embedded

Pubman

Repository,
Publication Mangement

Open Source
CDDL

MPG

 

3

yes

no

Part of the eSciDok infrastructure

Puma

Publicaton Management

Open Source
GPL2 (presumably from August 2011)

UB Kassel

Java, Tomcat, MySQL

1

no

no

based on  Bibsonomy

Symplectic Elements Publications

CRIS, Publication Management

Purchase annual fee or software as service

Symplectic Ltd

 

 

Symplectic Ltd

 

processes data from a variety of sources and feeds it into other systems (repository, content management, etc.)

Business Layer

System

Workflows

Authority Control

Delegation

Duplicate Control

Extra

Bibapp

yes

yes
for author, publisher, journal title

yes

yes

name disambiguation and pen names

DSpace

yes

yes
configurable against own data
and third party authority controls

yes
granular

no

see System Documentation for details

HSB

yes
on personal level
in Citavi

yes
only author names against GND

no

partial
only per subject group done in Citavi

 

PUB
Publister

yes

yes
only journal titles via Crossref

yes

no
only during import from ISI and Medline
based on their identifiers

 

Pubman

yes

yes

no

no

validation of metadata against configurable rules

Puma

no

no
Orcid planned
inclusion of quality standard planned

yes
managing of publication and bookmarks
no administration

yes

grouping, collaborative tagging

Symplectic
Elements
Publications

yes
metadata control

yes
integritytool

yes

yes

name disambiguation and duplicate control

Presentation Layer

System

Internationalization

Faceted Browsing

Export of Publication Lists

Embed in Other Web Pages

Bibliometrics

Visualization of Collaborations

Bibapp

not yes
work in progress at the TU Hannover

yes

yes
Lists in UI (style selectable) hence
transfer via COINS

no

no

yes

DSpace

yes

yes

yes
atm only communities, collections and items in default format
realizable via crosswalks

no
possible via REST, Atom feeds ...

no

no

HSB

no

yes

no
only single entries in DC, MODS, BibTeX, RIS

no
work in progress

no

no

PUB
Publister

no

no

yes

yes

no

no

Pubman

yes

no

yes

yes
REST

no

no

Puma

yes

no
only tagging

yes

yes
Plugins for Typo 3, Wordpress etc.
RSS feeds

no

no

Symplectic
Elements
Publications

no
work in progress

no

yes

feeds to a variety of systems

yes

no

Metadata

System

Base Schema

Multiple Schemata

Authority Control
against own data

Authority Control
against third party

Configurable Crosswalks

Bibapp

 

no

yes

partial

no

DSpace

Dublin Core

yes
configurable
controlled via registry

yes
configurable

yes
configurable

yes
crosswalk plugins

HSB

MODS

no

no

no
only GND and VNAF

no

PUB
Publister

MODS (?)

no

no

no
only journal titles

no

Pubman

internal

yes
must be mapped to internal schema fort deposit to IR

no

yes

no

Puma

Bibtex

no

no

no

yes

Symplectic
Elements
Publications

 

 

yes

yes

yes

Interfaces

System

SWORD
or other for deposti

OAI-PMH

OAI-ORE

Romeo/Sherpa

COINS

OpenURL

IDM

Bibapp

yes

no

no

yes

yes

yes

yes
LDAP

DSpace

yes

yes

yes

no

yes

no

yes
configurable, stackable

HSB

no

no
planned

no

no

yes
and UnAPI

 

yes
LDAP

PUB
Publister

no
work in progress

yes

no

no

yes

no

yes
but proprietary

Pubman

no

yes

no

no

no
but OpenSearch and Zotero

no

yes
Shibboleth

Puma

yes

no

no

yes

no

yes

yes
LDAP, OpenID

Symplectic
Elements
Publications

yes
enhanced

no
should be done in the frontend

no

yes

no
should be done in the frontedn

yes

yes
LDAP, Active Directory, Shibboleth

  • No labels