I spread the word in the Psychology field, for I'd like to contribute to an Open Source Psychology.
How may Psychology benefit from WikiData?
I asked the Web, and I'll repost here the most useful comments.
The first one:
"I like the idea of Wikidata as the central hub for linked open life science data. Yet, the concept is too general at the moment, so it's too early to conclude whether it's going to work for psychology data"
I'm not a Researcher and, while I really support the Open Source concept, I need more infos and suggestions from people who work in the Research field.
It's new field, so it's up to us to build it! ;-)
So...How could it benefit our Psychology?
For proof of concept if you are interested in seeding wikidata with a broad variety of pretty well curated biological data types we have ~50TB of CC0 data in GigaDB (http://gigadb.org) you are welcome to try. There are obviously plenty of public domain genomics datasets to work with (and I see you've already flagged our 50 bird/reptile genomes), but on top of sequencing and optical mapping data we have lots of interesting things like imaging (CT/micro-CT, DICOM, MRI), neuroscience (EEG, fMRI, multielectrode array) and mass spec (metabolomics and mass spec imaging both in the pipeline) data to play with. To do this systematically would probably take a bit of curation and improvements to the API we are working on, but even without that there could be some scope for exploration. Have you considered trying to tie some of this with "Bring Your Own Data" parties? We and ELIXIR-NL/DTL have been experimenting with some of these, and are currently working on getting some funding for more (see: http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/gigablog/2014/08/22/aint-no-party-like-a-bring-your-own-data-party/). I'm not sure if its problematic we are not in the EU, but a lot of the data producers and people we are working with are. Will try to talk more on this at FORCE2015.
@Snipre: Sorry if that was not clear, but the _materials produced for this proposal_ shall be put under the above-mentioned licenses. We are aware of Wikidata's policy that
"[a]ll structured data from the main and property namespace is available under the Creative Commons CC0 License" and fully plan to abide by that.
I am definitely supportive of this proposal, and I think that after the success of specific projects like Rfam, now is the perfect time for this. The momentum is definitely there now for an initiative like this, what with the funding of the Data Discovery Index Consortium in the US and many opportunities for data integration.
Looking over the current outline of the proposal, I would suggest discussing specific Wikidata developments a bit more. Wikidata is currently very well suited for providing mappings between databases. However, most of this information will presumably be populated by bots from the various member databases, which makes it similar to the many existing DB mapping services. The strength of Wikidata should be in the ability for users to correct annotation errors and add missing links. I think that this requires a lot of tool improvements. For instance, better wikidata searching, better summary pages, data aggregation and visualization, etc. Bots to propagate changes to related entries (where appropriate) might be useful too. I feel like wikidata is not particularly easy to use currently as a database, so this proposal would be the perfect time to suggest improvements.
@Peter Murray-Rust. Due to European law no database can be released in CC0 without the formal consent of the database owner. I just hope that the project team discussed in detail about licence problem because I can't see how the project can define to work under CC BY-SA 3.0 and CC BY 4.0 with Wikidata working under CC=. Solutions can be found but there is a need of a formal declaratoin that data released in Wikidata are under CC0. Right now Wikidata doesn't have a formal system to deliver data under a special licence like for Wikipedia or Commons (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Donating_copyrighted_materials). So something have to be done in that direction with the Wikidata team.
Nice initiative. But I think we will have a methodology clash between the open world and the scientific world. For scientific world referencing and source citation are two important elements which are not familiar in Wikidata. First we have to solve the problem of the CC0 licence: no european database will release data under this licence. So I wait for a clear explanation about how this proposal under the CC BY-SA 3.0 and CC BY 4.0 can fit the CC0 of the Wikidata database.
We use cookies on our website to provide you with the best experience by remembering your preferences even on repeat visits. By clicking "Accept" you consent to the use of all cookies. However, you can access the cookie settings to give controlled consent. You can also find more information in our Privacy policy
Diese Website verwendet Cookies, um Ihre Erfahrung zu verbessern, während Sie durch die Website navigieren. Von diesen Cookies werden die nach Bedarf kategorisierten Cookies in Ihrem Browser gespeichert, da sie für das Funktionieren der Grundfunktionen der Website unerlässlich sind. Wir verwenden auch Cookies von Drittanbietern, mit denen wir analysieren und nachvollziehen können, wie Sie diese Website nutzen. Diese Cookies werden nur mit Ihrer Zustimmung in Ihrem Browser gespeichert. Sie haben auch die Möglichkeit, diese Cookies zu deaktivieren. Das Deaktivieren einiger dieser Cookies kann sich jedoch auf Ihr Surferlebnis auswirken.
I spread the word in the Psychology field, for I'd like to contribute to an Open Source Psychology. How may Psychology benefit from WikiData? I asked the Web, and I'll repost here the most useful comments. The first one: "I like the idea of Wikidata as the central hub for linked open life science data. Yet, the concept is too general at the moment, so it's too early to conclude whether it's going to work for psychology data" I'm not a Researcher and, while I really support the Open Source concept, I need more infos and suggestions from people who work in the Research field. It's new field, so it's up to us to build it! ;-) So...How could it benefit our Psychology?
For proof of concept if you are interested in seeding wikidata with a broad variety of pretty well curated biological data types we have ~50TB of CC0 data in GigaDB (http://gigadb.org) you are welcome to try. There are obviously plenty of public domain genomics datasets to work with (and I see you've already flagged our 50 bird/reptile genomes), but on top of sequencing and optical mapping data we have lots of interesting things like imaging (CT/micro-CT, DICOM, MRI), neuroscience (EEG, fMRI, multielectrode array) and mass spec (metabolomics and mass spec imaging both in the pipeline) data to play with. To do this systematically would probably take a bit of curation and improvements to the API we are working on, but even without that there could be some scope for exploration. Have you considered trying to tie some of this with "Bring Your Own Data" parties? We and ELIXIR-NL/DTL have been experimenting with some of these, and are currently working on getting some funding for more (see: http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/gigablog/2014/08/22/aint-no-party-like-a-bring-your-own-data-party/). I'm not sure if its problematic we are not in the EU, but a lot of the data producers and people we are working with are. Will try to talk more on this at FORCE2015.
@Snipre: Sorry if that was not clear, but the _materials produced for this proposal_ shall be put under the above-mentioned licenses. We are aware of Wikidata's policy that "[a]ll structured data from the main and property namespace is available under the Creative Commons CC0 License" and fully plan to abide by that.
I am definitely supportive of this proposal, and I think that after the success of specific projects like Rfam, now is the perfect time for this. The momentum is definitely there now for an initiative like this, what with the funding of the Data Discovery Index Consortium in the US and many opportunities for data integration. Looking over the current outline of the proposal, I would suggest discussing specific Wikidata developments a bit more. Wikidata is currently very well suited for providing mappings between databases. However, most of this information will presumably be populated by bots from the various member databases, which makes it similar to the many existing DB mapping services. The strength of Wikidata should be in the ability for users to correct annotation errors and add missing links. I think that this requires a lot of tool improvements. For instance, better wikidata searching, better summary pages, data aggregation and visualization, etc. Bots to propagate changes to related entries (where appropriate) might be useful too. I feel like wikidata is not particularly easy to use currently as a database, so this proposal would be the perfect time to suggest improvements.
@Peter Murray-Rust. Due to European law no database can be released in CC0 without the formal consent of the database owner. I just hope that the project team discussed in detail about licence problem because I can't see how the project can define to work under CC BY-SA 3.0 and CC BY 4.0 with Wikidata working under CC=. Solutions can be found but there is a need of a formal declaratoin that data released in Wikidata are under CC0. Right now Wikidata doesn't have a formal system to deliver data under a special licence like for Wikipedia or Commons (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Donating_copyrighted_materials). So something have to be done in that direction with the Wikidata team.
"no european database will release data under this licence". I don't understand this. I am personally very supportive of this proposal.
Nice initiative. But I think we will have a methodology clash between the open world and the scientific world. For scientific world referencing and source citation are two important elements which are not familiar in Wikidata. First we have to solve the problem of the CC0 licence: no european database will release data under this licence. So I wait for a clear explanation about how this proposal under the CC BY-SA 3.0 and CC BY 4.0 can fit the CC0 of the Wikidata database.