Comment on:
The following comment refers to this/these guideline(s)
Guideline 12
Documentation
Researchers document all information relevant to the production of a research result as clearly as is required by and is appropriate for the relevant subject area to allow the result to be reviewed and assessed. In general, this also includes documenting individual results that do not support the research hypothesis. The selection of results must be avoided. Where subject-specific recommendations exist for review and assessment, researchers create documentation in accordance with these guidelines. If the documentation does not satisfy these requirements, the constraints and the reasons for them are clearly explained. Documentation and research results must not be manipulated; they are protected as effectively as possible against manipulation.
Explanations:
An important basis for enabling replication is to make available the information necessary to understand the research (including the research data used or generated, the methodological, evaluation and analytical steps taken, and, if relevant, the development of the hypothesis), to ensure that citations are clear, and, as far as possible, to enable third parties to access this information. Where research software is being developed, the source code is documented.
Guideline 17
Archiving
Researchers back up research data and results made publicly available, as well as the central materials on which they are based and the research software used, by adequate means according to the standards of the relevant subject area, and retain them for an appropriate period of time. Where justifiable reasons exist for not archiving particular data, researchers explain these reasons. HEIs and non-HEI research institutions ensure that the infrastructure necessary to enable archiving is in place.
Explanations:
When scientific and academic findings are made publicly available, the research data (generally raw data) on which they are based are generally archived in an accessible and identifiable manner for a period of ten years at the institution where the data were produced or in cross-location repositories. This practice may differ depending on the subject area. In justified cases, shorter archiving periods may be appropriate; the reasons for this are described clearly and comprehensibly. The archiving period begins on the date when the results are made publicly available.
Maintaining storage capacity in the geosciences
When it comes to the careful archiving and provision of older data, sufficient storage capacity has to be maintained so as to avoid losing data if not erasing it entirely. This applies in particular to climate-related observations, which should also be stored for a period of more than ten years if possible. Model simulations of complex systems generate very large quantities of data, so ideally the necessary extensive data servers should be set up and operated on a permanent basis.
Data should preferably be stored in repositories and be identifiable by means of a Digital Object Identifier (DOI). In order to reproduce results, it is sufficient to store basic data and the processing chain (software programmes) that builds on it. The internet platform re3data (Registry of Research Data Repositories) can be used to find a suitable repository, for example. The Integrated Climate Data Center (ICDC) at the University of Hamburg can be named as an example here: it provides easy access to climate-related observation data from in-situ measurements and satellite remote sensing. Another instance is the platform PANGAEA (Data Publisher for Earth and Environmental Science), where data can be archived and published in the earth sciences and environmental sciences.
Registry of Research Data Repositories (re3data)Integrated Climate Data Center (ICDC)PANGEAE Data PublisherThe comment belongs to the following categories:
GL12 (Natural sciences) , GL17 (Natural sciences)
Keywords:
FAIR principlesgeosciencesquality assurancerepositoryarchivingdocumentation