This title appears in the Scientific Report :
2021
Please use the identifier:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/nf-2020-0037 in citations.
Please use the identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/2128/27546 in citations.
In defense of decentralized research data management
In defense of decentralized research data management
Decentralized research data management (dRDM) systems handle digital research objects across participating nodes without critically relying on central services. We present four perspectives in defense of dRDM, illustrating that, in contrast to centralized or federated research data management soluti...
Saved in:
Personal Name(s): | Hanke, Michael (Corresponding author) |
---|---|
Pestilli, Franco / Wagner, Adina S. / Markiewicz, Christopher J. / Poline, Jean-Baptiste / Halchenko, Yaroslav O. | |
Contributing Institute: |
Gehirn & Verhalten; INM-7 |
Published in: | Neuroforum, 27 (2021) 1, S. 17-25 |
Imprint: |
Berlin
De Gruyter
2021
|
DOI: |
10.1515/nf-2020-0037 |
Document Type: |
Journal Article |
Research Program: |
Human Brain Project Specific Grant Agreement 3 Personalized Recommendations for Neurodegenerative Disease Decoding Brain Organization and Dysfunction |
Link: |
Get full text OpenAccess |
Publikationsportal JuSER |
Please use the identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/2128/27546 in citations.
Decentralized research data management (dRDM) systems handle digital research objects across participating nodes without critically relying on central services. We present four perspectives in defense of dRDM, illustrating that, in contrast to centralized or federated research data management solutions, a dRDM system based on heterogeneous but interoperable components can offer a sustainable, resilient, inclusive, and adaptive infrastructure for scientific stakeholders: An individual scientist or laboratory, a research institute, a domain data archive or cloud computing platform, and a collaborative multisite consortium. All perspectives share the use of a common, self-contained, portable data structure as an abstraction from current technology and service choices. In conjunction, the four perspectives review how varying requirements of independent scientific stakeholders can be addressed by a scalable, uniform dRDM solution and present a working system as an exemplary implementation. |